290 Responses to “(Letter) China Punishes France and EU”

Basically, China supported EU as a cohesive entity for many years but got nothing in return. Worse, the uncohesiveness of the EU hindered the relationship.

Got nothing in return? The EU is China’s largest market and the EU buys far more from China that the other way around. Pomfret has written more about how self-defeating it is for China to cancel the summit.

Don’t you think there other ways to show displeasure than using a ‘diplomatic atomic bomb’?
I mean, the Sarkozy/Dalai Lama meeting is just a meeting during a celebration of Nobel prizes winners … probably simply a discussion, and nothing to be decided.
Especially during a big economical crisis, which is expected to strike China quite hard.
I am very astonished by the move … IMO highly counterproductive.

This may sound naive but…
I don’t believe meeting the DL is supporting his independent movement.
This to me, is just another example of China not excepting dissenting opinions from another country and reading it as interfering with China’s internal affairs. But in reality, is it so hard to believe that President Sarkozy is meeting a religious leader that is respected by many people world wide?
The more China make a fuss about it, the world will see China not as a world power, but a wanna be world power. Yes growth in Chinese economy and its many loans to the western world can make it seems as China as a “Big Country” but the way the Chinese government present themself shows the world that Chinese Government is still very immature in their thinking and not worthy of other countries’ respect.

According to your logic, any country can see any one without hurting others?
How about Taliban hosted Bin Laden? Why US invaded Afghan just for that?
If China invites IRA leaders to China, will it hurt Britain?
Don’t tell me Dalai is just a spiritual leader. He is leading a separatist movement to try to make Tibet independent. Are you blind to see this fact?

@HSW
According to your logic, any country can be enemy.
Taliban is known to host suicide bombers.
Dalai Lama himself openly have said he is against violence. Unless you want to compare him to Osama Bin Laden who orchestrated 911 bombing and openly acknowledge it on international tv and gloat about it.
When has Dalai Lama openly gloat about Tibetan violence? instead he openly critisize it.
It is obvious that the Exile Government no longer listen to the Dalai Lama, so why is he such a threat?
If Tibetans in China has Mao’s protrait in their homes, and no longer wants the Exile government, why is HE such a threat?
You have to ask… does he know that different riots are going to break out? Honestly, if you look at the news closely, Dalai Lama is being used as a spokesperson, and often times.. spokesperson doesn’t know the evil/dirty side of their group.

I think you are on drugs when you wrote the comment. The real terrorist is Hu Jintao. It sounds like you are one among the many puppets of Communist China. I am sure your respond towards Communist china will change, when you your family fate meets same as the scientist who was executed by a Communist china week ago.

So the EU is so mature, knowing perfectly that entertaining Dalai Lama will achive nothing except angering Chinese and damaging China-EU relationship, and still, it will just go ahead? EU’s house is on fire, yet it still behave like a 3-year old. Grow up, EU is not the US yet.

I believe Chinese also know perfectly that EU’s entertaining Dalai Lama will achive nothing. China probably just use this excuse to avoid showing up in a meeting which will also achive nothing.

Don’t over-interpret that news. It’s a simple conflicts of schedule – can’t imagine chinese delegates talks to EU counterparts while the president of EU is meeting with Dalai lama at same time. Simple diplomatic etiquette. likewise, in beijing you don’t put US diplomas sitting next to Cubans. Don’t let either party embarrassed.

What I don’t understand is what is the purpose of meeting the DL by Sarkorzy, to promote human rights?

Look at the riots by black people in France, I would suggest to the big S to look at his country’s own human rights record before trying to preach to others.

I have met people from Britain, France and Germany, they all have this superior attitude towards Asians and Blacks. I sure would like to have an opportunity to examine how the colonial powers treated their conquered. You would be surprised at how many East Indians have this hidden hatred for the British even today. Why is that?

Racism is rampant in Europe and their governments and media are trying to cover it up.

You do have an avenue of expression available. As I have seen in the past, the French are masters at national strikes and protests. Perhaps you could launch a boycott of Chinese imports. Perhaps that boycott could extend to dockworkers refusing to unload ships with Chinese goods. Railway workers and truck drivers could refuse to handle Chinese goods. Furthermore, French consumers could refuse to buy Chinese products. After all, French jobs are at stake. Buy French products, support French workers. And, as I earlier said, the French are masters at national strikes and protests. 😀

Vive la France! Vive la Résistance! 😀

Maintenant, je veux chanter avec toi “La Marseillaise”! ::chuckle::

Here is where China is economically exposed. China, especially now, wishes to expand trade with the EU. Here are 2007 balance of trade figures between China and the EU.

Here is a commentary from John Pomfret of the Washington Post on this issue. I will post later another article from Reuters, written from the perspective of French business.

As Rome Burns, China Won’t Talk

John Pomfret

So the global economy is in meltdown, Europe and China are both facing the prospect of a seriously ugly downturn. They’d scheduled a summit for this week. You’d think both sides would want to participate. Not China.

China canceled it. The reason? Because several European leaders — including French President Nicolas Sarkozy — have recently met with the Dalai Lama. Whoa! Now there’s a solid reason if I ever saw one. You meet with Buddhist spiritual leader, we blow off key meeting on future of the world.

There is still something of the petulant 3-year-old here, brazenly pursuing something that is decidedly not in her interests. It illustrates the fact that China’s foreign policy, its strategy and its world view are anything but mature.

First, it’s not like China doesn’t need friends right now. It’s economy is in crisis. More than half of all of China’s toy manufacturers are belly up. The Federation of Hong Kong Industries says that one quarter of its members’ 70,000 plants in China have closed or will soon close. After annual double-digit growth for the past decade, China’s economy is only expected to grow by about 9 percent this year, if that. Next year could be a lot worse. Over the weekend President Hu Jintao told a gathering of Communist Party members that the global crisis could undermine the country’s economy and threaten the party’s capacity to rule China.

Europe is China’s largest market. But the Europeans are restless. European businesses want to know why they sell more stuff to Switzerland than to China. Cancel a summit and these questions will only grow louder.

Second, it’s not like a meeting between Sarkozy and the Dalai Lama is going to amount to much for the Tibetan cause anyway. It’s not going to result in the withdrawal of Chinese troops from the Tibetan plateau or independence for Tibet, right? And it certainly won’t resuscitate the moribund talks that representatives of the Dalai Lama have been holding with China for several years now. Those talks are practically dead.

So why did Hu really blow off Sarko?

The stated Chinese reason in this case bears scrutiny because of its brazen honesty. According to wire service reports, Qin Gang, a spokesman at the China’s foreign ministry, acknowledged to reporters that France was being held to a higher standard than, say, the United States, whose leaders routinely huddle with the Dalai Lama and barely suffer a slap on the wrist.

“France keeps saying that China is a strategic partner. Then it should do more than other countries, mean what it says and set a high standard for its behavior,” Qin said.
“We hope France will make efforts to honor its commitments and not do things that harm the feelings of the Chinese people or undermine the foundation for the two countries’ cooperation.”

Chinese tea-leaf readers have focused on another reason: They’ve wheeled out the old bogeyman of Chinese political calculus, claiming that unidentified “hard-liners” were behind the cancellation. That’s rich.

@OP: How old are you, 11? You have a peculiar vision of International Relations.

Basically, China supported EU as a cohesive entity for many years but got nothing in return. Worse, the uncohesiveness of the EU hindered the relationship. Some little country in EU could veto anything and didn’t need to bear any consequence. Being supportive of EU got China to nowhere. China is returning to the divide and conquer approach. That’s why the summit is canceled.

So China has been supporting the unity of EU for years (thanks!!), and now China sees that one of the EU countries meets up with the DL (is this new?) and now China gets moody and stops supporting, so EU disintegrates and Ha! this will teach EU.

Let’s get things straight: China will listen or not to EU representatives depending on the power it perceives they have, and depending on China’s own interests. For the economic points that will be discussed now, such as tariffs, EU does have some power. In other aspects it can be completely ignored.

@excited commenters. Just a few clarifications:

1- The EU has a problem with unity, yes, and this has nothing to do with China’s policies.

2- China has a problem to deal with DL, and this has nothing to do with the Sarko meting.

3- Universal rule in international relations: If you need to distract attention raise hell with the French.

4- DL is not a terrorist. Comparing him to bin Laden is low and slanderous.

5- China can speak any time with equivalent of DL in Europe. For example, the president of the Basque Country (who actively supports independence from Spain) has met up with authorities of many countries and sends representatives regularly to support Basque industry in Shanghai. No whining from Spain, why?: because unlike bin Laden, he does NOT support violence.

PARIS, Dec 2 (Reuters) – French firms doing business with China do not expect a diplomatic row over the Dalai Lama to scupper deals just yet, but analysts see a risk of Chinese boycotts unless problems are cleared up soon.

Beijing last week abruptly cancelled a gathering of European and Chinese leaders, angry over French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s plan for a meeting in Poland on Saturday with the Dalai Lama, the exiled Buddhist leader of Chinese-ruled Tibet.

On Tuesday, China berated Sarkozy again, demanding that he cancel the meeting to heal ties between China and the European Union. France holds the rotating EU presidency until the end of this year.

But French companies subjected to Chinese boycotts earlier this year, after the Paris leg of the Olympic torch relay was disrupted by protesters, have played down fears of a repeat.

Supermarket chain Carrefour, the main boycott target, opened two shops in China last week.

European planemaker Airbus, which is headquartered in France, has denied that negotiations with China were hit.

Firms note that German companies were unaffected when political ties with China froze in the wake of last year’s meeting between Chancellor Angela Merkel and the Dalai Lama.

However, analysts say Beijing could more easily punish French firms if the atmosphere between France and China worsens.

“They have been trying with the French to deliver some kind of economic hit,” said Andrew Small, Transatlantic fellow at the German Marshall Fund think tank in Brussels.

“If relations with France stay in a poor state they can keep that going. Obviously they don’t want this thing to persist but in some respects they have the capacity to do it.”

FRUSTRATION

That would hurt firms at a time of economic slowdown and aggravate frustration over how Sarkozy has handled ties with China, the country’s eighth largest export market last year.

Around 8,000 French companies currently ship goods to China and the value of large contracts in China totalled an estimated 14 billion euros ($17.74 billion) between 2003 and 2008.

French businessmen do not blame Sarkozy for meeting the Dalai Lama, who is branded a “splittist” by Beijing over his campaign for self-determination in Tibet. But some say the president has been clumsy in his dealings with China.

“He has handled the China subject very badly. His main defect is his inconsistency,” said Olivier Lefebure, a partner with China-focused law firm UGGC.

Businesses questioned the timing of the Dalai Lama meeting.

“He should have consulted and probably done this in his capacity as French president next year outside of his (EU) presidency,” said Joerg Wuttke, president of the European Union Chamber of Commerce in China, during a visit to Paris.

For now, French businessmen hope any damage will be limited. “Commercial and economic relations will be more difficult,” said Wang Jiann-Yuh, who heads the France-China Committee of French business lobby Medef.

“But to go from that to contracts not being signed, I don’t think it works like that. If it is in the Chinese interest to sign a contract and in the European interest it will happen.”

But businesses will be watching developments carefully.

“If the Chinese see relations are going badly, they will become more interested in the competition,” said Arnaud Baril, a salesman from one French joint venture in China. (Editing by Estelle Shirbon and Mark Trevelyan)

It is not inconceivable that EU (and maybe US) wishes to put pressure on China for a more compliant partner in dealing with current crisis. A high profile meeting with Dalai Lama; Resuming NATO contact with Russia … More to come?

@William
1. it was reported on udn. That he critcized it. I read it and am trying to find it. Also DL have openly said he condemn any forms of violence.
2. It is pretty obvious to me that the Exile government no longer listens to the DL. This is the reason why. I searched on all of the DL articles back to march in udn that I remember reading. Everything talking about the DL is always teh Envoy says this and teh Envoy says that. But when the DL actually makes a statement, it totally contradicts the words and the actions of the “DL Envoy”. Not only that everytime DL makes a statement of how He is Chinese and he does not ask for Tibetan Independence , the 西藏青年會 comes out and says otherwise.
Maybe I am over thinking it a bit, but DL is losing his influence if not already. I can’t post any of those articles that I read but feel free to search teh archive news of udn.
If you think I am wrong or naive…w/e

When France meets with the Dalai Lama it says we are not doing business with China at the expense of our values, France is speaking to French people. When China sits out of the EU Summit it says we are not doing business with “the West” at the expense of our values, China is speaking to Chinese people. This diplomatic posturing is only meant to show the people on either side that neither is selling out. The only losers in all this garbage are those in the middle.

“Being supportive of EU got China to nowhere. China is returning to the divide and conquer approach. That’s why the summit is canceled.”

To pursue that line sets China against its own principals. Is Sarkozy meeting the DL as the president of the EU or the president of France? Besides, if I want to turn a critical eye to China I could say that punishing the EU for the actions of France foments dissent among the other EU members and China is breaching its own rule of non-interference.

I’ll stick with; China is speaking to China and France is speaking to France.

The reality is that China’s actions will promote greater unity in the EU. In promoting its myopic view of “the west”, China is only strengthening its competition. Punishing the EU as a whole was a mistake.

Hey guys,
Forgive my ignorance, but what goes on in these summits anyways? In addition, can’t they plan future meetings later on? I just want to be clear on the current ramifications for china not going to the summit.

There is no serious consecuence for now. The real meeting is the one that will happen in April when the G20 + Obama meet to speak of the crisis.

This little conflict with the French is just a classic IR trick to create some noise (see my comment above). Perhaps China has decided that it’s time to rally the people in advance of the social shocks of the Crisis. Or perhaps it is preparing the way for a conflictive period in foreign affairs when it tries to implement protectionist/low RMB policies, strongly opposed by the West.

Chinese leaders are well known for being one step ahead. Hopefully I am wrong with this one.

Well, if you guys can read Chinese, you can go to Chinese website to have a look. 90% Chinese people support Chinese government’s attitude to cancel this meaningless China-EU summit. Frankly, China is a realistic country, China is much smarter and more long-sighted than EU, more clearly, now China doesn’t think EU is that important to China any more. If EU can do thing properly, well, fine, we can have a meeting; but obviously, Sarkozy isn’t that smart and does something foolish to irritate Chinese on purpose, so what, fine, cancel the meeting.

Tibet is part of China for hundreds of years; Dalai Lama is not just a spiritual leader, he is a politician too, who seeks Tibet’s independance, which can’t be forgiven by Chinese. For 1.3 billion Chinese, Dalai Lama is critisized of treason. He used to be the biggest slave owner in Tibet. After 1949, slavery wasn’t allowed in China, so he fleed China and seeked so-called independence with the help of USA and EU.

China is using its economic power to stick its nose up at the EU and wave to the US by doing business with them instead. If Sarkozy keeps playing dumb, China can make it difficult for Carrefour to do business in China and let Walmart take over. Chinese companies could boycott Airbus and turn to Boeing to make their planes instead which is exactly what they are doing.

No big deal. The EU cannot agree on much. It is not a single entity, whereas the Chinese government faces no such diversity/disunity. If you fall out with the EU is does not matter, if you find agreement with the EU it doesn’t have any real meaning either. The EU carries no weight, it’s just a loose collection of neighbouring countries … Slovenia, Cyprus and Estonia are going to be worried about the Chinese boycott?

* The structure of EU makes for bad governance, in that one country can veto a decision without “bearing any consequence”. China is fed up with this lack of unity.

* China supported EU, but now the current chairman of the EU still meets up with DL.

I think the second thing is something to discuss the rights or wrongs of in terms of Chinese and European policy, but the first one is a bit weird. Would it be better if countries didn’t have a veto (some people have proposed this)? Should EU be more like a country where there is a unified policy for most major areas, and how should this be implemented without making anyone feeling bad? It’s not like all countries/areas can enjoy a unified approach where some central government can make policies for everyone and people just accept it.

I think Chinayouren is right at the money when he says that this is just for show. If, like Juliette says, this meeting is “meaningless”, well then there wasn’t much use in attending it anyway, was it?

As for most other arguments for and against the DL/Tibet, it’s mostly boilerplate. I’ll just talk about one point:

“For 1.3 billion Chinese, Dalai Lama is critisized of treason”

From my experience in China, all the 1.3 billion people do not have the same opinion of things. Some haven’t grown up yet, others might be too poor to have ever heard about DL or Western opinions about him.

CYR, you are right about the unity problems of the EU. When even the smallest member has veto power, it is difficult to remain unified. As Ted pointed out, the EU should be thrilled to receive this kind of help from China.

I think you are hitting the nail on the head with your distraction theory. It sounds like the “tail wagging the dog” to me.

China is having some real financial difficulties at home. Just a few months ago, China thought itself immune to the credit crisis problems of more developed nations, especially the US. China thought that it had “decoupled”. Surprise! China’s current financial counter-measures and moves seem, IMHO, to indicate a certain sense of panic.

Thus, it makes sense to me that the leadership would try to “wag the dog” at home by picking a fight with the French. Hopefully, they can evoke some of that strident nationalism to divert attention from the impending financial shocks.

Regarding G7, G8, G20, APEC, Doha, Davos and ASEAN summits, little seems to happen. They seem quite the showcase for political proclamations and photo-ops. It is the panic-induced ad hoc meetings that seem the most useful. Most of these meetings remind me of the meetings I used to attend at Microsoft. For the most part they were meaningless and a waste of time.

—————-

#27

“Otherwise, this kind of CH tantrums are better taken with some sense of humor.”

Which is why I humorously suggested the national strike and protest.

This a risky financial game that China is playing. The EU and the French remember the Carrefour boycott earlier this year. And turnabout seems fair play. But any escalation in this matter can risk international trade. Not good during these globally recessionary times. Hopefully, cooler heads will prevail.

Hasn’t made front page news here in the UK, so I guess the CCP missed their mark. To be frank, the EU-China relationship is mainly about trade, and China will be the loser if that trade decreases – you didn’t see people in the EU complain when quotas were put on clothes.

The biggest concern is in the future – in Chinese website, 90% Chinese young people praised Chinese governent’s attitude based on a survey; thousands of Chinese left messages, “Cancel the China-EU meeting, thumb up”…..in China, young people like to show their opinions through website…..in 10-20 years, China will be in the hands of this 1980’s generation; compared to their parents’ generation, this 1980’s generation are better educated but more anti-westen and more confident; in July, it was 1980’s generation who launched anti-France activities; we can see, in the future, the China-EU relations will be harder.

In the future, this 1980’s people will be tougher on western countries if they try to interfere with Chinese internal things. Ironically, 1980’s generation grew up by being forced to learning English and western history and culture. They grew up in watching Disney cartoons and Hollywood movies. Most of my Chinese friends can speak fluent English and work for international companies, but in Chinese international relations, they show tougher attitude.

The threat of protectionism
Trade barriers would only hurt Sino-European relations

by Katinka Barysch

Published in the Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2008

China has canceled its annual summit with the EU to protest the plans of some European leaders to meet the Dalai Lama. This is bad news at a time when EU-China relations should be moving forward, not backward. The nature of this relationship matters not only for Europe and China, but for the international system as a whole.

One lesson from the economic crisis is already clear: The response will have to be global and the world’s current set of multilateral rules and institutions is not fit for purpose. This is why there has been a flurry of reform proposals for forums such as the International Monetary Fund, a push to revive the Doha round of trade talks and an effort to use the G-20, rather than the traditional G-7, to discuss lessons from the crisis.

Optimists say the crisis could accelerate a much-needed reform of the world’s institutional architecture. Emerging powers such as China, India, Brazil, South Africa and Turkey will have to get a bigger say and take on more responsibility globally. Without their active engagement, the world will not be able to address pressing issues – not only how to deal with the global recession, but also the future of multilateral trade, a post-Kyoto deal on climate change, fighting nuclear weapons proliferation, or poverty in Africa.

But there is an alternative scenario. If the emerging powers decide that international rules and institutions hinder, not help, their responses in a moment of crisis, they could become reluctant to support multilateralism in the future. The emerging multipolar order – in which the U.S. and the EU are just two of a number of big players – would be based on power politics, not rules. That would be an uncomfortable thought, especially for Europeans who have multilateralism written into their DNA.

The EU’s task is therefore to help China to become a “responsible global stakeholder.” Barack Obama may eschew George W. Bush’s unilateral tendencies. But the EU still has more credibility when it comes to defending multilateral rules than America will have for a while. So the prospect of EU-China relations deteriorating over the question of who sees the Dalai Lama and where is worrying. The fact that China is willing to cancel a summit with the EU – its most important export market and a key source of capital and technology – shows Beijing’s surging self-confidence.

Even if the dispute over Tibet is short-lived (as similar spats with Germany and others have been in the past), there is a bigger threat to EU-China relations going forward – that of protectionism. Protectionist sentiment toward China in Europe has been growing for a while. The EU’s trade deficit with China has almost tripled since 2003 and this year is going to be bigger than the U.S.-China deficit. Why is it, EU politicians now routinely ask, that we buy more from the Chinese than from any other nation, but we sell more to Switzerland than to China? The answer given, implicit or explicit, is usually that “China does not play fair.”

Disputes about China’s rigid currency policy have abated for now because the recovering dollar has dragged up the yuan against the euro. But European businesses continue to complain about the red tape, arbitrary administrative interference and intellectual-property theft that make it difficult for them to sell or produce goods in China. With growth in China slowing precipitously and social discontent on the rise, the Chinese are in no mood to be lectured about economic liberalization. On the contrary, many Chinese think that the financial and economic crisis has discredited the very model on which the U.S. and European economies are based.

If Chinese reforms stall or new protectionist measures appear, European businesses will call for retaliatory action. These calls were usually deflected by an open-market alliance led by Germany, Britain and the European Commission. However, anti-China sentiment is on the rise in Germany — witness the country’s new foreign investment law to restrict “unwanted” foreign buyers, not least China’s $200 billion sovereign wealth fund. Even in traditionally liberal Britain, people who see China as an economic threat outnumber those who see it as an opportunity by four to one. And the European Commission, under pressure from national governments, has toughened its stance since 2007, threatening to use more antidumping action and other trade defenses unless China starts opening up its own market. Punitive tariffs on Chinese screws, fasteners and candles are under consideration.

The Europeans should think again. Such one-off barriers would not make a dent in the €200 billion worth of goods that China sells to the EU every year. It would hurt European consumers by shutting the door to low-cost goods from abroad. And it would make the EU look insincere in China’s eyes. An EU that is serious about multilateralism must, as far as possible, use existing international organizations to defuse its economic rows with China. The EU’s recent success in reaching a deal with China over financial services providers after the it brought a case at the WTO court points the right way forward.

It will be hard for European governments to resist calls for new protection at a time of collapsing growth rates and lengthening unemployment queues. But more than commerce is at stake here. Bilateral arm-twisting and protectionism would further sour the atmosphere for EU-China relations. It would make it harder for the Europeans to convince China that it should respect the WTO, get engaged in the G-20, support United Nations reform and sign up to a global climate deal. Only if the EU itself is seen as playing fair will it have the necessary credibility in Chinese eyes.

Ms. Barysch is deputy director of the Centre for European Reform and co-author of “Can Europe and China shape a new world order?”, a CER report published in May 2008.

Honestly, speaking as a European (which feels quite odd for me), none I knew of would feel humiliated by such a thing; it simple doesn’t work that way in Europe. You don’t “give face” by attending meetings, at least not political ones.

I googled the phrase “china cancel summit” and most important European newspapers came up. I don’t think there is any need to report it more widely than this, unless some diplomatic row erupts.

If you look at the tone of the foreigner’s comments here or ask your foreign friends you’ll find that the French weren’t “humiliated” by China’s actions. My friends reactions have generally been **sound of hand slapping forehead**. Followed by,”Who is China to tell my President who he can or can’t meet with?”

Your comments and the statistics you cite just back up the notion that China’s actions are meant for an internal audience.

@Juliette: “the biggest concern is in the future – in Chinese website, 90% Chinese young people praised Chinese governent’s attitude based on a survey; thousands of Chinese left messages, “Cancel the China-EU meeting, thumb up”…..in China, young people like to show their opinions through website…..in 10-20 years, China will be in the hands of this 1980’s generation; compared to their parents’ generation, this 1980’s generation are better educated but more anti-westen and more confident; in July, it was 1980’s generation who launched anti-France activities; we can see, in the future, the China-EU relations will be harder.”

Maybe, but there are some points here:

* The nationalist part of the young generation always call for a hard line, whether it makes sense or not. These are the same people who would call for war against Taiwan at the slightest provocation. The question is how representative the internet crowd really is.

* I know some 1980’s people (colleagues) who refused to buy French goods but still disliked the aggressive nationalist tone of some of the participators.

* Even if the government is made up completely of 1980’s people, a government isn’t just people with roaring passion. They have long term policies to think about.

* Also, the 1980’s people, when in charge, might need to conform to the opinions of a younger, perhaps not so nationalist generation.

“Frankly speaking, China cancelled China-EU summit, which really humiliate EU and France; natually, EU media don’t want to report it widely.” My daughter and I had a conversation about “humiliation and saving face” the other day which echoes Ted’s earlier comment. My daughter has spent time in Europe, Africa and Central America. She is coming to visit me in Taipei next month, her first time in Asia. Like I told my daughter, Juliette, I can academically, intellectually accept Chinese traits and behaviors, like “saving face” and “fatalism”; I run into it all the time here in Taipei. Nonetheless, I can’t begin to emotionally wrap myself around the Asian need for “saving face” and fatalism; I am Russian Jewish American. Jews would have been obliterated off the face of this planet if we were obsessed with humiliation, “saving face” and fatalism. As my daughter tells me, “That’s just the way things are, dad.” She is right.

—————-

#44

I cannot imagine Zhongnanhai doing something without a plan.
Well, I think that if Beijing does that, this is because they are in deep deep troubles.
Let’s see what will happen next …

Amen. Deep, deep troubles and panic. As I said before, “wagging the dog”. Nice diversionary tactic. As Willie Pesek wrote today out at Bloomberg:

You would think China’s recent 4 trillion yuan ($586 billion) stimulus plan would fall into the forceful category. Yet Beijing’s plans to spend a fifth of gross domestic product were more spin than reality. Much of it was a tally of existing efforts, and economists were quick to call China on it. Expect China to get far more serious.

…

Economists such as Jim Walker of Asianomics Ltd. in Hong Kong are right that “China is now at the heart of the global slowdown.” Chinese officials must be miffed that their economic miracle is being interrupted by a crisis emanating from the U.S. That’s the risk you run when you create what’s essentially a one-trick economy.

…

China is doing its best to show it’s on top of things. Its efforts seem more like growing panic than steady policy making. The central bank cut its key interest rate by the most in 11 years last week, and the government said “forceful” measures were needed to arrest a faster-than-expected economic decline. …

The way I see it, China is not really mad at the fact that Sarkozy is going to meet Dalai, they are mad because now they are prob thinking Sarkozy as a backstabbing SOB, 反复无常的小人, it’s not only biz, it’s getting personal.

Both sides are kind of immature, China overeacted because CCP has very low threshold for dissenting opinions. On the other hand meeting Dalai is just pointless showboating politics wont do no one any good whatsoever, even a 12 yr old can see that but Sarkozy decided to go ahead anyway.

in 10-20 years, China will be in the hands of this 1980’s generation; compared to their parents’ generation, this 1980’s generation are better educated but more anti-westen and more confident; in July, it was 1980’s generation who launched anti-France activities; we can see, in the future, the China-EU relations will be harder.

Juliette and WKL, I once was in my 20s, too. Now at 57, I have grown up, I changed and don’t take myself so seriously. Life is too short. Have fun and enjoy. 😀

@Jerry: I only have 11 years between myself and the beginning of my 20s – even so, I’m happy for everything I’ve learnt during this time. I was way more radical and passionate back then, though I also knew far less. 🙂

@Moneyball: I agree that Sarkozy wasn’t too smart in doing this, at least not this time.

As for saving face, it’s something that is done in all cultures. The difference is that people in other places haven’t necessarily been taught to think of their country as a family where all criticism is taken personally. I don’t think that sort of patriotism is any inherent Chinese trait. I wouldn’t be too surprised if the same thing happened all the time during the Soviet era – the leadership of these countries have a need to make things personal, so as to deflect all criticism.

Regarding “saving face”, it just seems different to me here. It is much different than the US. Much more hypersensitive. Much more fear of failing. To me, making mistakes is how I have learned.

Most people don’t like being humiliated or making mistakes. I don’t either; it hurts at times. It just seems to bother me much less than the people here; I get over it pretty quickly. Like my dad has told me so many times, “Jerry, it is not important how many times life knocks you down. What matters is how many times you get back up.” Perhaps we bounce back quicker because of all of the generations of persecution and misery we suffered. Who knows? I just perceive a very big difference here.

“The difference is that people in other places haven’t necessarily been taught to think of their country as a family where all criticism is taken personally.” You have a point there. I know that I don’t take criticism against Israel and the US personally.

I know that I am far more direct than my Chinese friends here. Sometimes I think that I overwhelm them with my directness. Whatever!

@Jerry: I basically agree with you, it is much stronger here, and I believe the government uses it to link the feelings to nationalism. If it wasn’t for the latter, people would just be worried about losing face in front of families and friends.

As for American directness, I can be overwhelmed by it too at times. 😀 I’m sometimes overwhelmed by Chinese directness too (like “who the hell messed up your hair”)? After a while you get used to it, however.

“I’m sometimes overwhelmed by Chinese directness too (like “who the hell messed up your hair”)? After a while you get used to it.”

I have noticed that occasionally, too. Sometimes, Chinese people will blurt out the strangest things. Or sometimes ask very personal questions; questions I would never dream of asking somebody I did not know very well. Occasionally, I will give them the “look”. I usually just smile or laugh or playfully shake my head. Or sometimes say, “Nosy, nosy!” 😀 Doesn’t bother me much, if at all.

I guess we have different senses of propriety.

And sometimes I just feel this “forever” gulf between me and the Chinese here. Hard to explain.

Why specifically Chinese people will blurt out the strangest things? Maybe it is strange because you are not familiar with their customs comparing to an American blurting out things. Your prejudice are showing.

China considers Tibet as a Domestic issue and EU talking to the Dalai Lama is a violation of that issue. I’m sure if China start talking to other 3rd world countries about raising ire to the US about the Native Americans or gitzmo, to Spain about the Basque, or other Western Nations about the unhappy minorities, Western Countries won’t appreciate what China is doing. Even so, China can be accommodating when Western Nations is forcing the Tibet issue down China’s throat but at some point China has to put its foot down.

I don’t understand why the Jews are hated so much around the world. And the Chinese are the Jews of Asia. Anti-Sinoism is rampant in the West thanks to the propagandist media and governements. Why did they choose the Lubrivitch building in Mumbai and killed and apparently tortured the Jewish civilians. Leaving a poor 2 year old child. In Quebec, there are numerous burning and defacing of Jewish institutions and cemetaries. Anti-Semitism is not exclusive to Quebec. To me, the Jews have done well for the world. China has also contributed to the good of the world, it tries to make peace with the US, EU, India, Russia, etc. But like the Jews, China has been constantly negatively portrayed. Why? Because of Darfur, Tibet, Taiwan? Did China created the genocide in Darfur? Did China created the separatist movements in Tibet and Taiwan? To me, these problems are more of the creation of the West. China would have been able to resolve these issues peacefully if not for the interference of the West. Media censorship, human rights abuses are all practiced by the West today but these are labeled on the Chinese. China is not the only country that produces inferior and dangerous products. Look at Mad Cow disease, listeria and e-coli outbreaks, look at birth control pills that caused birth defects and breast implants that caused cancer. All products of the West. I think the Jews and the Chinese must work together so people would know the truth. So foggy heads like Sarkozy and Merkel don’t grandstand to their home audience furthering the lies. Stand up for the truth or m’t’bbine sur neutre as we say in Quebec.

It is very funny you mentioned the native americans. Because Native Americans have autonomy in United States. There are 3 governmental systems in U.S:Federal, State and the Reservations. State Government and Reservations are basically on the same level and the Native Americans govern themselves.

It seems that the separatist Movement in Taiwan and in Tibet, China is not blameless.
Did you know that when KMT lost the civil war and moved into Taiwan, there were Communists movements in Taiwan then? It was the original Communist in Taiwan that supported the independence from the KMT. This taken from Professor Xin Hao Nian in his many speeches. He quotes his sources from Mao’s book.
Now, its funny that China cannot take any criticism from Anyone or Any country. U.S is the most hated country in the world especially in Europe right now. But you do not see the President of the United States cutting off relations in Europe because they made a statement about how dumb Bush is and how dumb this Iraqi war is. There are many middle east countries that have hosted Bin Laden, but you don’t see U.S attacking everyone of them. That is because the U.S government knows, Bin Laden is their own creation.

As for Media Censorship and Human Rights Abuse in the West. If we have as much Media Censorship in U.S then we wouldn’t have many of the indy films that we do. We wouldn’t have Michael Moore making a film publicly criticizing the government. In America, Human Rights Activists are free to walk to street and make changes. Can you do that in China?
I was reading the news the other day on a professor that was jailed because his students accused him of being unpatriotic. Because he mentioned FLG in his lectures. Is this the open minded Chinese Society that its supposed to be? Cape No.7’s release was postponed in China because of “political sensitivities” but really, its a love story between two people of enemies brought together and separated by the War, by postponing the film, is this the lack of Media Censorship in China? Can China solve this one peacefully?
Like I said, China is growing, but it is not mature enough to handle these modern issues. The thinking is still stuck in the past.
As a Chinese American from Taiwan, who wants the cross strait relations solved peacefully which ever way, I find all of the latest news about China extremely disheartening.

Miaka9893 – Thanks for your additional information. I agree with you that China still has a long way to go to be equitable with the West. But as a kid living in rural Canada, my family was in penury and subject to discrimination, now the situation is much better, the West has come a long way as well. I don’t really see the blacks in deep south US during the 50’s being able to have their civil rights changed overnight, let’s say expect complete civil rights for blacks in the 60’s. Why expect the same from China. The foreign influences in Tibet and Taiwan actually impede China’s development for a better society. The armament of Taiwan, I don’t believe for a minute that those US arms per se will deter the mainland. The funding of Tibet, how does the Dalai Lama financially support all the 200,000 or so Tibetans living in India. (please don’t tell me they work). I don’t believe that his speaking tours or public contribution will fund that. Interestingly, I have some friends who are DL supporters and they have never parted a penny out of their pockets for the cause. Why the West never reported the DL was sued in India for human rights abuses by his own people. The Falun Gung, where do they get their money from. When I talk about Western censorship, I am relating specifically to anti-Sinoism. If you look at any Western media, China is always bad; bad food, bad products, bad government, bad media, bad looking, bad human rights, bad just bad. China and the Chinese are dehumanized by the Western media. As an example, if you look at the Melissa Fung story in which she was the reproter for the CBC and was kidnapped and held for ransom in Afgan. After 28 days, she was released. The Globe and Mail reported by GRAEME SMITH portrayed what a coward Melissa was under siege of the kidnappers. Afterwards, the report was proven to be completely false and made up. Try to find that report today from the Globe and Mail, it has disappeared. Instead, they have replaced with a more favourable report by another reporter. Please go ahead, search in the Globe and Mail and try to find the report from GRAEME SMITH on the Melissa Fung story. Could you name me some Chinese that hold multi-national corporations that are not started by them. Positions are given to Indians, Koreans, Japanese, all countries that would be part of the pro-West axis. Could you name any Chinese that hold significant positions either in media or government. I think that while China is afraid of open criticism of its government, the West is afraid of presenting China fairly. Both are in essence censorship. If you want to talk about true democracy and fairness in the media, I would like to see true and fair reporting on China and the Chinese from the Western media.

I disagree with you. Tibet problem is not an invention of the west, it is a creation of modern China, specially since begin o Mao era.

Tibet was independent or a vasal state under Yuan (Mongol) and Qing (Manchu) dinasties, an nobody is a vasal state unless coerce to do it. At other times the country was de facto and de jure independent of China.

Only military occupation of the red army subjugated the country back to China.

But coming back to modern times, and the current “realpolitik” situation it can be stated like this.
“China’s problem with Tibet is not the Dalai Lama. The greater threat is the increasing appeal of active resistance in Tibet to Chinese rule. A successful negotiation with him is the only way to ensure a peaceful outcome to the stand-off. China should understand this.”

The yardsticks are different, We should compare China 20 years ago to China today. China’s living standard has been improved a lot using this yardstick.

The FunMeter (my new invention here, haha) may vary among countries. You have more fun in China than in America for $100 as an example. You can have a good massage, good dinner, and watch a good show for 2. In US. $100 buys you far less. Medical treatment is far less expensive in China.

Paris folks let the dogs litter all around, and the Chinese send the dog food with melamine to control the dog population 🙂 and eat dogs to set up a good example. 🙂
LOL

@ChinaTalk
I can’t argue for Tibet, but Taiwan..
Ever since the KMT took over there has always been armament in Taiwan. With that said, it is the issue of chicken and the egg which comes first… because Mainland have many missiles pointed at Taiwan and said we won’t do anything as long as Taiwan doesn’t declare independence… but because of the missile pointing at them Taiwan feels insecure with China and therefore wants more armament and it fuels the Taiwanese Independence movement. Taiwan being that it has a democratic society will focus on the opinion of its people and will not silence the opposing opinion like Mainland government. But the longer that Mainland has those missiles Taiwanese citizens will feel threatened. It is an endless cycle and with China wanting to be the “Big Country” need to show “Big Stomach” for their desired reunification….
As for comparing China with the 50’s and the 60’s… there is no comparison because we are not in the 50’s and 60’s and with China being the aspiring “Big Country” all eyes are going to be on them because other countries have gone through the same transformations and want to tell China the mistakes that they made and doesn’t want them to make the same ones over again.
Media in the west is not all about Bad China. You have mistaken or only watch one news source. During the Olympic NBC did daily information on China and how big the streets were. There are many Chinese politicians in U.S. example is the ex governor of Washington and there may be one in Obama’s cabinet and I can’t remember his name. In fact the western media has been more fair towards China than China has towards any other country. Western news media make our government more transparent and XinHua and other Chinese news outlet only seemed to praise Chinese Government there are no criticisms. They help Chinese government to be less transparent.
Back to politicians.. if you look around U.S specifically, if there is a state that is majority Chinese populated you will get a Chinese in office. I just think you based on “media bias” on 1 instance and not look at the others. I can point out many many instances.
On that note why do you not see chinese politicians holding office in America? One can speculate that Chinese Americans are not engaged enough. They hold on to their cultural values of earning money and providing more and more wealth to their children, being a politician doesn’t make a lot of money they rather be lawyers, engineers and doctors. But things are changing. A lot of these have nothing to do with media bias. Also the media were very happy to write news reports on Chinese American Nobel Prize Winners, how is that a media Bias against the Chinese?
The fact of the matter is.. Americans did write about Mad Cow disease, and the bad product from Japan.. China is not being singled out. There is fair reporting. Just don’t watch FOX news you will never see balance news from there.

“Most of my Chinese friends can speak fluent English and work for international companies”

Can I just say that the internet using, foreign-educated, MNC-employed portion of a population are not representative of any country anywhere, as they can only constitute a distinct minority of that country’s population. Chinese people are ordinary – this means that the majority of them do not speak English or any other foreign language, this means that the vast majority work in ordinary jobs which are not specially associated with MNCs, this means that they are ordinary people with run-of-the-mill opinions and do not especially care about whether or not China attends an EU conference.

“Ironically, 1980’s generation grew up by being forced to learning English and western history and culture. They grew up in watching Disney cartoons and Hollywood movies.”

The United States is not the west, or representative of it, no matter what US leaders may think – what has this to do with the matter at hand?

“it was 1980’s generation who launched anti-France activities”

‘fraid not. In fact authors like Song Qiang (author of ‘China can say no’) who came of age in the eighties-nineties were not supportive of the move to boycott Carrefour. If by ’80’s people’ you mean “people born in the late eighties” – then perhaps, but this is much more to do with the fact that they are young and gullible than anything else. The number of them who said they didn’t trust western news reports but believed that it was necessary to boycott Carrefour because “France was going to boycott the Olympics” and when asked where they had read that answered “on a website” were staggering.

@ecodelta
You are wrong, China is a multi-ethnic country. The Hans are the majority, but there were times Chinese throne was held by Monglos and Mancurians, but Yuan/Qing are Chinese as Ming/Song. Hans, Monglos, Mancurians, Huis,etc are all Chinese. The Western propaganda tries to equal Chinese to Han, so anyone is not Han is not Chinese, therefore to incite separatism in China. Han/Monglo/Mancurian/Tibetans are like Daleware/Miami/Cherokee Indians, all native people of China, are all Chinese. The Westerners like to project their ugly history of colonization and genocide of Americans/Asians/Afrians on to China. To protrait Han Chinese as a foreign people invading the native land of Tibetan Chinese. This is so wrong, it’s like Chippawa Indians and Cherokee Indians, they are almost the same people just different tribes, sometimes Chippawa takes Cherokee land, sometimes other way around. Just like Monglo Chinese and Mancurian Chinese both had taken Chinese throne along Han Chinese. But the West wants to divide Chinese brothers, to stir conflict, this is called divide and conquor.

Tibetans and Hans went back more than a thousand years. The first King of Tibet, Songtsen Gampo married Han princess WenCheng in AD647, the temple devoted to Princess WenCheng still stands in Lahsa to this day. This happened 500 years before any Lama ever existed in Tibet. Later Tibet incorporated into China(1200’s). The name Lalai Lama is mongolian, there was even a Mongolian Dalai Lama. From 3rd Dalai Lama onward(~1400’s), all Dalai Lama’s had to be commission/certified by Chinese Emperor (Yuan/Ming/Qing) or National government of China. The current 14th Dalai Lama himself had his title commissioned by the Central government of Republic of China in 1927. How could Tibet be an independent country??? You are brainwashed by the Western media, which is nothing but a propaganda machine when it reports on China.

The way I see it, China is not really mad at the fact that Sarkozy is going to meet Dalai, they are mad because now they are prob thinking Sarkozy as a backstabbing SOB, 反复无常的小人.

Right on! My though exactly! I am surprised Pomfret at WaPo, a supposedly seasoned China hand who knows a thing or two about Chinese culture, didn’t realize that in his post.

What really pisses China’s leadership off, is Sarkozy’s duplicity, even a common folk like me can feel it. The ugly episode of torch relay in Paris really rankled a lot Chinese, and Sarkozy’s moral grandstanding during the running up to the Olympics didn’t help either.

France then sent in high ranking special envoys, the French ambassador said all the right things in Chinese media, and Sarkozy did show up in Olympics. So Chinese leadership thought the two sides have reached an understanding that Tibet is of utter importance to China, and whatever misunderstanding there was, is now cleared, two country should move on.

But just when Beijing considered the whole thing over, Sarkozy ripped a new one. I’d be royally pissed too if I were Hu Jintao. Unless Sarkozy makes some serious promises to Zhongnanhai, I am not sure if Sarkozy will ever get an invitation to visit China again during his term.

I, and I think most Chinese will agree with me at home or aboard, totally and completely support the Chinese gov’t’s action in safe guarding the soverngity of China. What is there to talk about when the other side is poking you right in the eye. In the French case, they are announcing that they are going to poke you in the eye before you come over for tea. Which self-respecting person will let that happen? When it comes to sovernigity, dipolmacy and economics come second. Unless Westerners realize this, they will never understand and will always be “shocked” and make fun of chinese for throwing a “fit.” To me, it is very rational and simple, Dalai Lama’s agenda is against the fundamental interest of China, a large and mulit-ethnic country. His politics of separatism and ethnic division in whatever form must be met head on. There is no room for neogiation on this basic core prinicipal issue, period. I think China should not engage with people who are clearly out to harm China’s basic fundamental interest which is its sovernigity, whoever it is.

For the Euorpeans and Americans, they are being used by the Lama to advance his political agenda. The question is when will they figure that out? I’d like to see how much of price they are willing to pay before they figue that out. To keep the Americans away from China’s northeast border, China is willing to fight a war that cost 1 million causalities in Korea. People must understand that the chinese people will do whatever it takes so that the Europeans and American don’t do a repeat of what they did 100 years ago. Last time, they came in, it was in the name of religious freedom (basically the freedom to convert people into their own believes) and to make money. This time is in the name of individual freedom and rights (basically converting others into their own believe system), make money and god knows what else. I say it is all BS. The time when the Dalai Lama go back to be the god-king of Tibet will be the day when a US/Nato military base will be in the Himalayas. Some may not believe me, but tell that to the Russians and what they were promised after the Cold War. Never.

The other thing is that the Dalai Lama has the power to stop all this in a heartbeat, and he has chosen not to it for 50 years. Using foreign military help first, when that didn’t work, use his talent and skills to build up a network of foreigner patrons to push his political agenda for him in pressuring the Chinese gov’t and harming China. I read an article many people say written by Mao in the early 60’s about the Dalai Lama. Mao at the time predicted that with all the noble/high class priest types who lost all the power in the 50’s around him, it will probably take the Dalai Lama 60 years to think it through and come back to the motherland. I guess the he still has 10 more years to reconsider. I hope he will eventually make the right choice

Why specifically Chinese people will blurt out the strangest things? Maybe it is strange because you are not familiar with their customs comparing to an American blurting out things. Your prejudice are showing.

pug_ster, of course my prejudices are showing. In fact, I have written at FM about my flaws, prejudices, biases, failings, beliefs, standards, insights, perceptions, acculturation, opinions, filters, experiences, feelings, ad infinitum. Very openly and honestly. In fact, I wrote this earlier out at FM somewhere.

“IMHO, we all have prejudices. Seems to me to be human nature. The question to me is whether or not we allow our prejudices to become self-prisons.”

I don’t know about you, but I am fatally flawed. Damn! But I am not going to let that stop me from living or contributing here at FM. Perhaps, you are much more enlightened than I and you have no prejudices or biases. I just don’t know how to get to such a state of enlightenment. In fact, I just wish I was enlightened. 🙂

I fail to see the point of your comment; to me, it goes without saying. But I am glad you commented. Gives me just one more piece of insight.

My sense of sarcasm pushes me to comment. Sometimes, in jest, I tell my daughter, “I wish I were as smart as you think you are.” To you, pug_ster, I would jest, “I wish I were as enlightened as you think you are.” ::LOL:: 😀

This is not that China is deliberately looking for a whipping boy, France. China has warned Sarkozy in advance a month ago. If he still does it, it will hurt China-France relations for sure.

Dalai Lama is not a simple monk as people think, whether the excuses being a religious leader or Nobel Peace Prize winner ( he got it thanks to the cold war era) . DL was a vice -chairman of Chinese National Congress under Mao, for God’s sake, for 9 years, happily! For all those DL lovers, you got to honestly ask yourselves: PLA “invaded”Tibet in 1950, with Dalai happily palling around with hardcore Maoists soon after. What happened in 1959 and why he rebelled?

Anyway, Tibet is de facto under Chinese rule. Independence? NO way! Unless you beat Chinese super army. China didn’t loss it in her weakest moment in history – late 19th, early 20th century, surely she will not loss it now or in the future. No Chinese leader , current communist party or future democratic far-right neocon whatsoever, dare to loss one inch of China proper motherland. Otherwaise, he will be condemned by the worldwide Chinese for the generations to come.

Even Taiwan’s president Ma just nixed Dalai’s visit to the island. Being a doctorate in Harvard Law , Ma knows precisely what he is talking about : strichtly according to Taiwan’s constitutions, Tibet is territory of Taiwan ( Republic of China) too. Independence? – On his dead body.

I completely agree with you except that Europe and the US are using the Dalai Lama, just like using Falun Gong as a doorstop to China, and not the other way around.

@Jerry 69

I am not perfect either as there’s always a different point of view seeing every situation as such in the case of the Dalai Lama, and such. Many westerners are unfamiliar with Chinese customs and culture so it is consider it strange to them. As they say, You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

@miaka 9383 on comments #64
The people in Taiwan are divvied into two groups, these who want independent and those who don’t. The wants are local Taiwanese people (called native-province people) who have by generations resented people coming from mainland China in 1949 (called out-province people). Many of local people look down on out-province people and call them “mountain pig” Some of older generation local people even have nostalgia of “good old days of” Japanese occupation. In US, they look down on people from People’s Republic of China even more. I am not saying they all do but many of them do.

It is this deep culture resentment and self imposed superiority trigged strong desire for independence. It has nothing to do with communist, freedom of speech. The desire is so strong, they even want to help Tibetan to get their independence.

Taiwan’s security comes from US and US only. They have no ability to protect themselves from neighboring countries. If China agreed to let Taiwan to be independent, US has no interest to protect Taiwan no more. Taiwan will be left on its own and will not only get its ass kicked but also economy wise, they will have to live on other countries left over.

As for your information on Dalai Lama, he ever condemned violence on March riot so I don’t think you can find anything to prove it. As for Dalai Lama condemning any violence, what you said is not true either. He actually said that sometimes the violence is necessary. I suggest you read more into the Tibet/Dalai Lama matter.

I won’t join the discussion on whether the French or the Chinese side did the right thing. I’ll just clean up some details:

@facts: “The Western propaganda tries to equal Chinese to Han”

No, not as far as I know. Most people don’t even know the word Han, or Hui or Zang for that matter. The closest you come is that people talk about “Chinese” and “Tibetan” which is not what Chinese people say. Nobody claims that there is only one people in China, and that they are the Han.

“so anyone is not Han is not Chinese, therefore to incite separatism in China.”

This is also an interesting piece that gets said over and over – the Western powers “唯恐天下不乱” but I have honestly never seen any opinion piece or people hoping China is unstable. Quite the contrary. People fear what would happen if China would fall into civil war or chaos.

LZ: “The time when the Dalai Lama go back to be the god-king of Tibet will be the day when a US/Nato military base will be in the Himalayas.”

Why would the DL go back and restore the system exactly like it was before 1950? If China one day brings Taiwan back, will there be a cultural revolution, an “anti-right” campaign and a Great Leap Forward there? Also, is there a US/NATO base in Mongolia?

EW: “No Chinese leader , current communist party or future democratic far-right neocon whatsoever, dare to loss one inch of China proper motherland. Otherwaise, he will be condemned by the worldwide Chinese for the generations to come.”

This sounds like a slogan to me, rather than some real set of facts. China did in fact, historically, lose Vietnam, Korea and Mongolia. Where are the world-wide condemnations for that?

As they say, You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Now if somebody could just tell me what “facts” are and what “truth” is, I would be thrilled. Who is “they”? Whose “facts” and “truth” are “we” talking about? Epistemologically speaking, that is. 😀 ::LOL::

@pug_ster: “I completely agree with you except that Europe and the US are using the Dalai Lama, just like using Falun Gong as a doorstop to China, and not the other way around.”

I also found that statement strange. I’ve mostly heard that the Western world uses DL, not the other way around. However, I guess there’s something in the relationship for both of them.

Somehow the fight between West and China seems like some gongfu movies to me: two people fight perfectly, almost like dancing, as if they completely anticipated the move of the others. It’s mostly for show.

@pug_ster, Jerry: Both Americans and Chinese sometimes seem strangely direct to me, only because they’re direct in a way I’m not used to. I’ve heard both Americans and Chinese describing Scandinavians as somewhat cold and reserved, but also very direct or seemingly unconcerned when answering questions that require a certain degree of “passion”, like this:
Chinese/American: I brought something for you!
Scandinavian: OK.

After quite some time here in China, I sometimes find the habits of my countrymen odd. I guess it’s a reverse culture shock.

The idea of Dalai Lama lost control over Exile government is ridiculous. There is no exile government if there wasn’t for Dalai Lama. It is Dalai Lama’s publicity that brings in the money that financed the whole exile government. Without him, these government officials don’t even know where or when to get their next meal. The whole Tibetan exile community in India as a matter of fact are depending on Dalai Lama in a very big way not mention majority of them worship him as a god.

No single person in Tibetan community has anything even remotely close to offer what Dalai Lama has provided to Tibetans in exile. They need Dalai Lama and Dalai Lama don’t need them.

Some idiots come out say Dalai Lama is out of step and they want to go their own way. How? These people can even make a decent living without Dalai Lama sending them the money to keep their Tibet independent activity.

2008 was the year of duplicity and we can have the Olympics, big business and every government in the world to thank for it. It was at China’s behest that all problems and effrontery be pushed until after the Olympics.

· China graciously offered Internet access and greater press freedom, now the firewall is back up, journalists are being beaten and allegations brushed aside. http://www.fccchina.org/what/statement291108.html ; http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2008-12/03/content_7268337.htm (I love the sentence “The provincial investigation team and Xinhua both failed to reach Van de Weghe by telephone”. They released findings without contacting those who were beaten.)
· US graciously delayed arms sales to Taiwan until after the Olympics.
· China graciously promised freedom of expression then denied all petitions to protest. (The park received some nice advertising though… who needs the outside world anyway).
· Sarkozy graciously delayed meeting with the Dalai Lama until after the Olympics.
· Food safety issues in China were covered up until after the Olympics. I read an article in the local paper about Melamine in US products a few days ago. ahh yes… the good old propaganda machine is strong as ever.
· China graciously respected intellectual property and copyright laws for a three-month window around the Olympics. (I loved that the DVD stores vanished from the tourist areas during the Olympics. After finding one I was told I would have to wait until after the Olympics for any new releases.)
· Microsoft graciously allowed the rampant piracy of its products until after the Olympics.

China asked everyone to be nice before the Olympics and, to the extent that expression can be controlled, western governments and businesses played along. But there are a lot of pent-up emotions on all sides and right now, everyone is getting their shot in.

Wukailong #76: “Somehow the fight between West and China seems like some gongfu movies to me: two people fight perfectly, almost like dancing, as if they completely anticipated the move of the others. It’s mostly for show.”

“I was reading the news the other day on a professor that was jailed because his students accused him of being unpatriotic. Because he mentioned FLG in his lectures. Is this the open minded Chinese Society that its supposed to be?”

Wonder if you are talking about the professor from Shanghai University of Politics and Law. First of all, the professor was not jailed.

The story was based on a liberal-thinking professor’s piece from his blog with a glaring title: “Students informed on me to be an anti-revolutionary,” saying that two of his students argued against what he taught in a class and later informed on him to the local security bureau which set up a case investigation and subsequently had a talk with him. The piece deplored how the society and even the educated were still caught in the Cultural Revolution era.

There were two sides of opinions surfaced on Internet. Some felt sympathetic for the professor. Others saw nothing wrong about the students’ action, as they were merely practicing their constitutional rights as a PRC citizen to openly protest against and report on what they thought as unlawful and harmful to national interests.

Later on one of the professor’s former students posted a piece providing more information on what he perceived as deeply disconcerting content from classes the professor had taught, ranging from radical pro-Taiwan independence to using unsubstantiated materials to assert that much you learned from textbooks are lies.

the liberal professor surly have enjoyed freedom of expression and has made most of his privilege to influence the youth judging from what he usually taught at class, if the information is reliable (he also had the “first say” by smartly writing a post to gather public sympathy before anything bad happen to him thus the article from China Media Project http://cmp.hku.hk/2008/11/27/1407/), while even in the states what should or shouldn’t be taught at class is still often a matter subjected to impassioned public debates and law suits sometimes.

As I saw it if the professor has the right to teach whatever he feels proper (though other may feel otherwise), the students are entitle no less right to do whatever they feel proper (other may feel otherwise). However the security authorities would handle the issue is crucial but a different matter, something waiting to be seen. I have to disagree with the professor that so far this event is just an example to show to the world how much China as a society has truly progressed.

“I really wonder how will Sarkozy react if China supported separatist movement within France?”
Go on, really, it would be really funny.
Btw, You forgot Brittany, Alsace, Corsica, Martinique, Guadeloupe, Polynesia …
FYI, I am from one of the region you cite and your comparison with Tibet is just fairly indecent.

China never lost Vietnam and Korea per se. They had alway been China’s satellites (Han tributary system) until recent times. Those are not China proper but neighbours in every sense. Regarding Outer Mongolia and part of Syberia, Li from Ch’ing dynasty and Mao were mainly responsible, each having his circunstances though. The former one has been condemned in most history books, while no one dares to touch the latter, yet. Tibet is a totally different story. Mordern China is in a peace time thus no excuses for lossing it, either for leaders in PRC or ROC.

“As I saw it if the professor has the right to teach whatever he feels proper (others may feel not), the students are entitled no less right to do whatever they feel proper (others may feel not) about his teaching as long as the law permits.

@EW: Indeed. Your description of Korea and Vietnam is completely accurate. Tibet was no different in the past, it’s only different today.

@Charles Liu: I think it would be quite OK to support independence in all the places you describe. I’m interested in why you look down on Basque separatism, but I think it might have to do with what you seem to think about minority people in general.

Strange. On Wikipedia I read that the independence crusaders of Savoy were able to advance their cause, and there wasn’t even a threat of war. I thought separatist movements were suppressed everywhere. 😉

@Chinktalk: “Racism is rampant in Europe and their governments and media are trying to cover it up.”

Enter the term “racism” into the search window of any British newspaper and you come across reams and reams of soul-searching rhetoric. Say what you like about the effectiveness of any of it, but ‘trying to cover it up’ is the exact opposite of reality. I wish you could be where I am sitting right now, in a lecture hall in a British university, and see the range and variety of people of every race studying to be solicitors and barristers here in the UK. Is there racism in the UK? Most certainly. Is it being hidden or covered up by the media? Are governments ignoring it? Most certainly not. Is there much evidence that British society has changed greatly since the days of Enoch Powell’s ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech? Indeed there is, especially from where I am sitting, and this is true to a significant extent in all of the countries of western Europe.

@FOARP
🙂 yes, we talk about race. Because of it, now we know instead of saying hey that m-f-ing whatever, we now know to think it instead. PROGRESS!

But seriously, I don’t see it much of taking any sort of moral high ground by just talking about the issue. In one place, it’s talked about, in another place, no so much, so what? didn’t help that guy being shot to death because he was the wrong color or was speaking a different language. I feel you’re comparing two bad situations, “we suck less than you”.

For me, these types of actions are liberal affirmations to counteract liberal guilt people feel by not doing anything substantive. Sort of like Al Gore buying carbon offsets, makes you feel good but doesn’t really help if you don’t commit to lowering your personal consumption.

Sorry if I have a chip on my shoulder with this liberal stuff, i’m just tired of being approached by people trying to get me to support whatever the hell they want to push.

I’m sorry but sometimes you got to take it personal. Especially when people are saying weird shit about your entire people. What if I said Jews men are all this, and women all that, and we need to clean them from the face of earth? Would you take that personal? How would you feel?

Sometimes you got to get mad.

What you are describing is criticism of a nation’s policies, or actions of some constitute of a people (majority or minority), which is perfect fine, and I try, most of the time, to not take it personally.

@YO – I agree that merely talking about it is not enough, but no-one can say it is hidden or covered up. My point was not yet another stab in the whole “Chinese are more racist than other people” argument (I believe that that has not even been touched upon in this discussion), nor am I some middle class liberal (what ever that might mean) who is seeking to absolve himself of guilt. You’re just going to have to accept my word on that, there is no way of really proving that you are not racist, especially not when commenting on the internet.

I personally feel that progress has been made against racism through speaking about it – this seems clear by the way that employment and culture have become much more open to people of non-British descent since non-European immigrants first started arriving in this country in large numbers back in the ’50s . This doesn’t mean that you don’t come across things which clearly smack of racism. As an example, one of the guys I met on a friend of mine’s stag weekend works as a recruiter in the IT industry, he told me that his clients paid £5,000 more on average for a British-origin consultant than they would for one born overseas because they ‘understand the culture much better and are easier to work with’ – clearly racist as he admitted himself. It’s a long way from hearing such things to getting those employers in court for unfair employment practices, but it happens eventually once the right evidence gets into the right hands. Progress is slow, but it is happening.

Now, it’s a long way from saying that British society contains the kind of racism described above to saying that people in the UK support the Dalai Lama because they are racist against Chinese people and hate them – and anyone who attempts to make that jump is, frankly, insane. The same goes for the rest of Western Europe as far as I am concerned – Eastern Europe I can’t really speak for as I have never been there. I know plenty of Eastern Europeans, but being English-speaking, foreign-educated and reasonably well-off people it would be foolish to think of their views as representative of the average Eastern European, and equally foolish to think of the English-speaking, foreign-educated, and well-off people one sees commenting on internet forums such as this one as truly representative of the view of the average Chinese person.

@William Huang #73
I am not going to argue about Tibet with you since I have read whatever I read and did research and He has condemned violence. I tried to pull archived articles from UDN but I couldn’t do it because of the member stuff.. You won’t be able to change my belief there….

As for taiwan

That is where I differ with you. It has everything to do with freedom of speech and more and more less about racism against 外省人。 I know the history of Taiwan. But as history goes it changes. When Green tries to pull the cultural card during this last election, they failed. How? The people elected Ma.
Cultural superiority from the Taiwanese is not enough to FUEL the independence. But a threat to your livelihood and and life will….
Majority of people in Taiwan support the status quo, and they are extremely happy about the continuing cooperation between two places. However, they don’t feel safe. Missiles are pointing at them. This has nothing to do with racial/cultural superiority. I read UDN daily because it is the most balanced Taiwanese News Media that I have found in a long time. That FUEL the desire of independence or the desire for continual armament in Taiwan.
Mainland Chinese have the deep understanding that Taiwanese are brothers. A lot of my family and friends would ask.. if we are looked at as Brothers why missiles pointing at us?
The issue of deep cultural resentment that is 10% of the issue nowadays. I am from a family that is both 本省人 and 外省人. In fact, my mother’s maiden name is 蔣(Jiang). And my family is not fooled by DPP and their tactics. Many Many Taiwanese people are smarter nowadays. 10% of population cannot declare independence for Taiwan. But continue military threat will.

Now “Nostalgia” of the Japanese Occupation: Taiwanese and the Japanese have a love hate relationship. As showned in Cape No.7 if you choose to watch it. My grandmother was thankful for the Japanese government because she got an education. However, she would always said, the Japanese Girls would always be No.1 and her No.2 when they have the same score. But this Nostalgia from the Older Generation does not and will not constitute a motive for independence.

As for U.S. influence. Back to freedoms and human rights. People in Taiwan believes strongly in their fundamental rights and freedom. Sometimes when they argue with a Mainlander they say “I do not agree with you but I will defend your right to speak your opinion out loud”. A lot of common Taiwanese are afraid that if they reunite their rights are going to get taken away. Even if that is not the reality that is still their fear.
What you have to understand is that the desire for independence goes a lot deeper than just the self imposed superiorities and cultural hatred. And U.S right now is a safety blanket that Taiwan eventually will grow to let go as their democracy matures, even if they are spending tons of money buying a uselss plane.
I am not going to argue about what I know first hand. If you want to refute me fine but arguing over this is moot point.

Hey, nice to see you.
I like your vid … there is still a hope for me 🙂
What I find the most impressive is even his hand gestures looks more Chinese than French …
Hand gestures, that’s the kind of habits that are really super hard to lose.

FOARP, the Tibetans should be really embarassed to be supported by a tyrannical government such as one that invades others on false WMD pretext, using Depleted Uranium and White Phosphorus incindiary munition against innocent civilians in violation of the Geneva Convention.

I appreciate you take time to reply and below are my few more points since nobody has the monopoly on the truth:

Green party lost election not because they pulled culture card but the corruption. However, they were in power because their push for independence.

As for the threat of missile pointed at them, I would have to say, it’s partially caused by the leadership in Green Party who advocated independence. China as a nation has the right to protect its unit and sovereignty. It is China’s national security at stake. Taiwan does not belong to the people in Taiwan just because they live there. I understand that there is history to the whole situation but this does not change the principle. Otherwise, Mexican immigrants in Texas and California can declare part of US as Mexico.

The same as for the democracy, it is an overused word. In recent history democracy is just an excuse to justify for anything whatever the western power wants to do. For example, just because US is a democracy, it does not have to right to invade another sovereign country like Iraq for the purpose of spreading the democracy. When Russia cooperated with the west it is democracy now they are not. Who decides? Likewise, democracy is not reason for the Taiwan to be independent.

Just few examples:

1) Tibet should be independent because China is not a democracy
2) Kosovo is independent because Serbia is not a democracy (?).
3) South Ossetia and Abkhazia should not be independent because Georgia is a democracy
4) Northern Ireland is not unified with Republic of Ireland because Britain is a democracy
5) Kashmir cannot be independent because India is a democracy

No country in the world can come up with any international rules or laws to define who can and cannot declare for independence. So the muscle rules not reasons. Taiwan is safe as long as it submitted to will of major western countries. China gets attacked because China stands up to them and they have hard time accepting it. That made some second-class word citizens very edge so they say, well, at least we are democracy.

No, not as far as I know. Most people don’t even know the word Han, or Hui or Zang for that matter. The closest you come is that people talk about “Chinese” and “Tibetan” which is not what Chinese people say. Nobody claims that there is only one people in China, and that they are the Han.

“so anyone is not Han is not Chinese, therefore to incite separatism in China.”

This is also an interesting piece that gets said over and over – the Western powers “唯恐天下不乱” but I have honestly never seen any opinion piece or people hoping China is unstable. Quite the contrary. People fear what would happen if China would fall into civil war or chaos.
==========================================================================

1. You are wrong to equal Western public opinion to Western propaganda. The ignorance of Western public on the knowledge of China being a multi-ethnic country is precisely the result of the half-truth misleading Western media reports. That’s why “Most people (westerners) don’t the word Han”, the western media never reported the truth on the history of Chinese Tibet.

2. You don’t see ordinary people want China unstable. Again you confuse the opinion of ordinary Westerners to the reports on Western media. Go open up any Western publication these days, Headline reads, “ecnomic slow down, China is feared of unrest” etc. The Western media always portrait Chinese people being mad at CCP, once Chinese people lose their jobs, they will rise to topple CCP. The only reason CCP can rule China is because economic progress. This is a lie.

Go to check the Pew Research Survey on people’s attitudes of countries in the world. Chinese government consistantly ranked HIGHEST in satisfaction ratings by her citizens in the world many years in the roll. Do you ever hear this mentioned in Western media? I don’t think so. All you hear is Chinese people protesting this protesting that. China has a population of 1.3 billion, if the satisfaction rating is 90%, that means 13million people are not happy with Chinese gov. even 1.2 billion Chinese are happy. The Western media dives into the 13million unhappy Chinese, report exclusively on those unhappy Chinese. One day a story, the different stories of unhappy Chinese can go on thousands of years. The majority happy Chinese are totally ignored. This is called factually true, but mis-leading white lies, to protrait China as a huge repressive jail for the 1.3 billion Chinese. This is the art of propaganda!!!

bt Says: December 4th, 2008 at 9:07 pm @ HKer #71
I like your vid … there is still a hope for me. What I find the most impressive is even his hand gestures looks more Chinese than French …Hand gestures, that’s the kind of habits that are really super hard to lose.

Gaudfroy began studying Chinese in 1998 while still in France, creating within his Paris apartment an “almost 100 percent Chinese environment”. Helped by a Chinese girlfriend, he studied at home for hours and engaged in conversation with any Chinese person he happened upon.

“I didn’t have much else to do so I would spend all day long studying Chinese in any possible way,” he says. He tried a language course at a Paris university, but lasted just weeks, finding tapes and self-study to be a more suitable method.

I found something really interesting through the news .
All I have known is that the Chinese government just postponded the summit, but didn’t cancel it.
Chinese media said the country who cancelled the summit was France..
Which country exactly cancelled the summit?
Was there any misunderstanding about this? Or any other worse purpose inside?
It seems like all the people in European are criticising the cancellation decided by China,
but cancellation and postpond are really different!
.. is there anyone who can prove this to me?

You need to back up your claim that my position on Tibet is propaganda. I call western media propaganda, I have back up my claim. You can not dismiss my position as propaganda without factual support. What I have presented on Tibet are historical facts, if you think they are propaganda why don’t you show me your proof.

It’s always easy to deny facts presented by Chinese people as government propaganda, without evidence to backup such denial. Such mentality among Westerners is precisely the result of western brainwash, that anything a Chinese states that contradicts Western myth is government propaganda.

BRUSSELS, Dec. 4 (Xinhua) — The Chinese ambassador to the European Union (EU) on Thursday called for a more comprehensive and deeper mutual understanding between China and the EU.

Song Zhe, head of the Chinese Mission to the EU, also called for broader participation among the public to enhance bilateral relations, which have encountered twists and turns, including the recent postponement of the China-EU summit over the Tibet issue.

Speaking at the Europe-China Academic Network annual conference, Song said that China attaches great importance to its relations with the EU, and is determined to further develop bilateral ties.

On the basis of mutual respect, equality and mutual benefits, China is willing to deepen cooperation and mutual trust with the EU, work together with it to overcome the current global financial and economic crises, deal with the challenges stemming from globalization, and to push for a long-term steady development of bilateral relations, he added.

In his first speech on Sino-EU relations since the postponement of the China-EU summit originally scheduled for Dec. 1, the ambassador said that the Sino-EU relations are good “on the whole,” but what happened over the past year clearly showed that both sides urgently need to deepen mutual understanding.

He said that as their global strategic importance is on the rise over recent years, both sides have common interests to forge closer ties. China and the EU need more coordination and cooperation in dealing with regional and global challenges such as energy security, climate change and especially the wide-spreading global financial crisis, he added.

Meanwhile, there are indeed huge differences between the two sides as a result of different historical backgrounds, cultural traditions, and levels of economic and social development, he noted.

These differences, he said, are not irresolvable. “Both sides need to take a more tolerant approach and a more positive and comprehensive attitude toward each other, and take consideration of the other side’s feelings on issues related to its core interests,” he said.

“There is no room for compromise on issues concerning China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, as it is related to China’s core interests and the feelings of the 1.3 billion Chinese people,” he said.

“Any attempt to put pressure on China on such issue will not only be unwise but also be ineffective, and will eventually damage the common interest of both sides.”

Earlier Thursday, Joao Aguiar Machado, deputy director general for relations with Asia and Latin America at the European Commission, told the meeting that the bases for the EU-China relations are “quite solid” and neither side is willing to let the relations fall back.

He called on both sides to work together to find ways to keep their bilateral ties moving forward.

Is China so insecure that a mere meeting with the DL can cause so much consternation? It would appear to me that China is very insecure.

How can you deal with another if you have to be “on pins and needles” all of the time, for fear of offending them? The solution is to not be on “on pins and needles”. If the Chinese don’t like Sarkozy meeting with the DL, well, I just say, “Tough!” And if the Chinese, in retaliation against Sarkozy’s meeting with the DL, are willing to hurt their own economic self-interests, then they are crazy. And I don’t think the Chinese are crazy. No sane person “cuts off their nose to spite their face”.

Which is why I think this whole Sarkozy-DL-China-EU Summit affair is all for show. Internal and external propaganda on China’s part.

All that said, I like the DL. At least the persona he projects. So China, I know that I have now miffed you with my statement on the DL. Please feel free to cancel/postpone/withdraw from all future meetings/summits/conclaves with me. I would be thrilled. 😀 ::LOL::

“You are wrong to equal Western public opinion to Western propaganda. The ignorance of Western public on the knowledge of China being a multi-ethnic country is precisely the result of the half-truth misleading Western media reports.”

Your original post only mentioned “Western propaganda”, not any difference between media and public opinion. Generally, if any propaganda is successful, people will believe it. There is a slight difference between Western public opinion and the media outlets, but just like in China, most people seem to resonate with the press.

Most journalists might not know more than the readers of their newspapers. Chances are they simple do not know that there are many minority peoples in China. I don’t think that’s a good excuse, but it’s certainly much more plausible to me than any conspiracy theories about Western propaganda.

“You don’t see ordinary people want China unstable. Again you confuse the opinion of ordinary Westerners to the reports on Western media.”

Here (and in the rest of the text) you’re saying that the Western press wants China to disintegrate or be chaotic. I don’t see how any of your examples back the claim. Certainly there is a naive hope on some reporters’ part that people will somehow stand up as one and demand democracy, and most people having that hope don’t see the problems a hasty democratization would entail. But nobody thinks along the simple lines of “唯恐天下不乱”.

“Go to check the Pew Research Survey on people’s attitudes of countries in the world. Chinese government consistantly ranked HIGHEST in satisfaction ratings by her citizens in the world many years in the roll. Do you ever hear this mentioned in Western media? I don’t think so.”

It’s better to know than to believe (“I don’t think so”). Here you have the survey mentioned in Herald Tribune (I hope it qualifies as “Western media”):

Is it terriblly important to listen to what a polititian says? Clinton said he did not have sex with that woman. Dalai Lama was a pure dictator before 1950. 1/5 Tibetan males were in monasteries. This was not sustained by high productivity of old Tibet. It was by serfdom and slavery. He is now possessing both religious and political power in the Tibetan in exiles community and he is seeking both religious and political power in the future “Greater Tibet” in the name of “autonomy”.

The French must know this person very well to think it is worth it. If the French have the rights to choose to meet their saint do we Chinese have the rights to choose our business parterners?

I am against religious rule. I am against any religious figure whom seeks political power.

@Jerry: “What happens if this meeting never occurs? I would think not much.”

That seems to be one of the best conclusions on this thread. Juliette said the same thing, though she called the meeting “meaningless”. 😀

And as for meetings, I only have one every other week. 🙂

I can understand meeting with the DL is a very contentious issue for the Chinese government, though. They are a big country and can use policies like severing ties with countries that have diplomatic relations with Taiwan. Other countries that are not so happy, like South and North Korea, will just have to accept that China and other countries have contact with both.

@kui: “The French must know this person very well to think it is worth it. If the French have the rights to choose to meet their saint do we Chinese have the rights to choose our business parterners?”

That why I think it’s hard to blame any of the sides. They are just using their ideological weapons against each other.

@facts: “What I have presented on Tibet are historical facts, if you think they are propaganda why don’t you show me your proof.”

Even though this is not directed towards me, my answer is that you ought to know better than this. What is _your_ proof that what you present are historical facts? That you read it in books or newspapers?

@ChinkTalk (#112): China is only mentioned in passing, and in that case a specific senator is quoted as saying he’s “very concerned, particularly about the Chinese.” Nowhere does it say that China actually spies on Canada, and the source given is said to be “an obscure financial-intelligence agency.”

Wukailong – thanks for your perspective. If you read some of the comments, some readers seem to accept the nuance that China is guilty. It is this type of innuendos that give the Western media the loop hole to distort the real picture.

@miaka9383 #57
Quote:It is very funny you mentioned the native americans. Because Native Americans have autonomy in United States. There are 3 governmental systems in U.S:Federal, State and the Reservations. State Government and Reservations are basically on the same level and the Native Americans govern themselves.

Why don’t you put things into context? Native Americans got their autonomy only after half a century ‘s slaughter, with most of its population wiped out and most of their land taken. To keep those survived Native Americans on a small territory called reservations was an option only secondary to total annihilation of native Indians. Kudos to US government.

China cancelled the meeting because it has nothing to propose… Sarkosy meeting with the Dalai Lama is just an excuse; The DL was recieved by European parlment yesterday, by Belgium the day before, by Angela Merkel at the beginning of the year, by George Bush, etc. etc…
China is affraid of European’s quotas on importations (Europe is China’s the first client).

China wants to try the “using the force” way. Let’s see.
If Europe is not united, it might work. But if Europe is united…

@107 Wukailong
“Your original post only mentioned “Western propaganda”, not any difference between media and public opinion. Generally, if any propaganda is successful, people will believe it. There is a slight difference between Western public opinion and the media outlets, but just like in China, most people seem to resonate with the press.

Most journalists might not know more than the readers of their newspapers. Chances are they simple do not know that there are many minority peoples in China. I don’t think that’s a good excuse, but it’s certainly much more plausible to me than any conspiracy theories about Western propaganda.”
====================================
In terms of propagada, there is a huge difference between public perception and media portrait of an issue. The public perception is the result of media brainwash. Of cause by mixing the two, to a degree you can hide the conduct of demonization and dehumanization of China in Western media. Opening up any western publication, when it comes to China, it’s always police butality, accidents/death, disaster, corruption, etc… how would this effect public percetion? You tell me. Public percetion is the result of Western propaganda, therefore, public perception and media distortion are two entirely different issues.

The ignorance on Chinese population groupings in Western media, can be excused as the ignorance of Western news organizations as you want. But there are multitutes of field experts out there, there are multitutes of Chinese nationals out there, so why not let the experts and Chinese talk about China? Are there always Jews interviewed to talk about Isaeral? There are academic publications and historical documents out there, why are no investigative journalists to research the topic, as so much news reporting has been on China? No. The excuses you proposed are just excuses, there IS a willful determination to keep Western public misinformed and remain hostile to China by the Western media.

On the issue of Pew Research poll results, you cited one source to prove this information is being relayed to the public. Indeed it is a reasonable article. This type of defence of Western media is standard, the devil is in the numbers. For instance, just today you go find all China related news you can find, how many are like the reasonable article you cited? how many are the run of the mill—human rights/Dalai Lama/China bad/ pieces? To use an insignificantly tiny among of fair reporting as a defence to the overwhelming distortion and misinformation on China reporting, is in and of itself a white lie, trying to present Western media as “free” and “balanced”. No, It is a propaganda machine, clear and simple. So can you compare the actual frequency of mentioning of the Pew Research results compared to that of the “fear of unrest”, “Chinese people being oppressed” reports in Western media? Let me know what you find.

On issue how distortion helps to stir conflict in China. By the exaggeration and disproportion in representation of minority discontent Chinese citizens, and blidly and eagerly rationalizing and legitimizing all claims of the discontent in China, of cause, has the effect of encouraging and empowering such people to take it to the strees to topple the existing authority. The happier majority Chinese never gets reported in Western media, is this a fact? This is exactly “唯恐天下不乱”as you said.

Of cause you can always attribute those distortions and misinformation in Western media as innocent and blissful ignorance. In the Western reporting of March 2008 Tibet riot, we have all seen how such reporting has become, it is not even distortions any more, it was purely fabrication and utter demonization, it was nothing but LIES. You are entitled to your opinion, but to reasonable minds, Western media has been and is on a propaganda campaign to demonize and dehumanize China.

First of all facts, I would like to know what “facts” are, what “truth” is. Most of what passes as facts and truth seems subjective at best, more like opinions based on other opinions.

Secondly, as Wukailong remarked, the IHT (the global edition of the New York Times) is involved. If you had read the “The 2008 Pew Global Attitudes Survey in China: THE CHINESE CELEBRATE THEIR ROARING ECONOMY, AS THEY STRUGGLE WITH ITS COSTS — Near Universal Optimism About Beijing Olympics”, you would have seen on page 7 that the National Journal and IHT are involved with the project. Nobody seems to be hiding this “opinion” survey.

The Pew Global Attitudes Project conducts worldwide public opinion surveys on a broad array of subjects, including people’s assessments of their own lives and their political, social and economic attitudes. It is a project of the Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan “fact tank” in Washington, DC, that provides information on the issues, attitudes, and trends shaping America and the world. The Pew Global Attitudes Project is directed by Andrew Kohut, president of Pew Research Center. The project is principally funded by The Pew Charitable Trusts.

Since its inception in 2001, the Pew Global Attitudes Project has released 22 major reports, as well as numerous commentaries and other releases, on topics including attitudes toward the U.S. and American foreign policy, globalization, terrorism, and democratization.

Findings from the project are also analyzed in America Against the World: How We Are Different and Why We Are Disliked by Andrew Kohut and Bruce Stokes, international economics columnist at the National Journal. A paperback edition of the book was released in May 2007.

Pew Global Attitudes Project team members include Bruce Stokes; Mary McIntosh, president of Princeton Survey Research Associates International; and Wendy Sherman, principal at The Albright Group LLC. Contributors to the report and to the Pew Global Attitudes Project include Richard Wike, Erin Carriere-Kretschmer, Kathleen Holzwart, Juliana Menasce Horowitz, Jodie T. Allen, Elizabeth Mueller Gross, Carroll Doherty, Michael Dimock, and others of the Pew Research Center. The International Herald Tribune is the project’s international newspaper partner. For this survey, the Pew Global Attitudes Project team consulted with survey and policy experts, regional and academic experts, journalists, and policymakers. Their expertise provided tremendous guidance in shaping the survey.

The Pew Global Attitudes Project’s co-chairs are on leave through 2008. The project is co-chaired by former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright, currently principal, the Albright Group LLC, and by former Senator John C. Danforth, currently partner, Bryan Cave LLP. Following each release, the project also produces a series of in-depth analyses on specific topics covered in the survey, which will be found at http://www.pewglobal.org. The data are also made available on our website within two years of publication.

Finally, your summary takes Pew’s summary out of context. So let’s start with the question asked

Overall, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way things are going in our country today?

Seems like a nebulous question asked in a nebulous political environment. Considering that China had the highest country satisfaction score, 86%, by far and away, perhaps the score should be treated with a fair amount of skepticism. After all, the next nearest score was Australia with 61%, followed by Russia at 54%. Most of the 24 nations scored in the 40’s, 30’s and 20’s. (Kind of reminds me of Saddam Hussein winning elections with 100% of the votes) China’s score should be considered an outlier. As an outlier, further investigation is needed to explore China’s disproportionate score.

So, with that in mind, let’s take a look at Pew’s summary. I have highlighted several comments. Somehow you failed to mention these points.

The 2008 Pew Global Attitudes Survey in China:
THE CHINESE CELEBRATE THEIR ROARING ECONOMY, AS THEY
STRUGGLE WITH ITS COSTS
Near Universal Optimism About Beijing Olympics

As they eagerly await the Beijing Olympics, the Chinese people express extraordinary levels of satisfaction with the way things are going in their country and with their nation’s economy. With more than eight-in-ten having a positive view of both, China ranks number one among 24 countries on both measures in the 2008 survey by the Pew Research Center’s Pew Global Attitudes Project. These findings represent a dramatic improvement in national contentment from earlier in the decade when the Chinese people were not nearly as positive about the course of their nation and its economy.

The new Pew Global Attitudes survey also finds that most Chinese citizens polled rate many aspects of their own lives favorably, including their family life, their incomes and their jobs. However, levels of personal satisfaction are generally lower than the national measures, and by global standards Chinese contentment with family, income and jobs is not especially high. Further, Chinese satisfaction with these aspects of life has improved only modestly over the past six years, despite the dramatic increase in positive ratings of national conditions and the economy.

In that regard, Pew’s 2007 survey showed that the relatively low Chinese personal contentment was in line with the still modest level of per-capita income there – looking across the 47 countries included in that poll, life satisfaction ratings in China fell about where one would predict based on the country’s wealth. (#1) The current poll takes a deeper look into how the Chinese people evaluate their lives and specific conditions in their country, providing further insight into the contrast between the average Chinese’s satisfaction with the state of the country and its economy and relative dissatisfaction with elements of personal life.

The new data suggest the Chinese people may be struggling with the consequences of economic growth. Notably, concerns about inflation and environmental degradation are widespread. And while most Chinese embrace the free market, there is considerable concern about rising economic inequality in China today.

These are the latest findings from the 2008 Pew survey of China. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with 3,212 adults in China between March 28 and April 19, 2008, a period which followed the March 10 onset of civil unrest on Tibet and preceded the May 12 earthquake in China’s Sichuan Province. The sample, which is disproportionately representative of China’s urban areas, includes eight major cities, as well as medium-sized towns and rural areas in eight Chinese provinces. The area covered by the sample represents approximately 42% of the country’s adult population. (#2)

Almost universally, the Chinese respondents surveyed complain about rising prices – 96% describe rising prices as a big problem for the country, and 72% say they are a very big problem. And nearly half (48%) of those polled say health care is difficult for their family to afford.

But the Chinese are almost as concerned about equity in China as they are about inflation. About nine-in-ten (89%) identify the gap between rich and poor as a major problem and 41% cite it as a very big problem. Worries about inequality are common among rich and poor, old and young, and men and women, as well as the college-educated and those with less education. In that regard, despite economic growth, concerns about unemployment and conditions for workers are extensive, with 68% and 56% reporting these as big problems, respectively.

Complaints about corruption are also widely prevalent, with 78% citing corruption among officials and 61% citing corruption among business leaders. Six-in-ten also rate crime as a big problem. Concerns about both corruption and crime are widespread among all segments of China’s population.

While corruption is seen as a problem, most Chinese (65%) believe the government is doing a good job on issues that are most important to them. However, poorer Chinese and residents of the western and central provinces covered in the survey give the government somewhat lower grades than do citizens in eastern China.

Environmental issues also emerge as a top problem and a top priority. Roughly three-infour (74%) cite air pollution as a big problem and 66% so named water pollution. In response, as many as 80% of Chinese think protecting the environment should be made a priority, even if this results in slower growth and a potential loss of jobs.

#####

#1 For more on the 2007 findings, see “A Rising Tide Lifts Mood in the Developing World,” Pew Global Attitudes
Project, July 24, 2007.
#2 For more details, see the Survey Methods section of this report.

facts, you wrote that “The majority happy Chinese are totally ignored. This is called factually true, but mis-leading white lies, to protrait China as a huge repressive jail for the 1.3 billion Chinese. This is the art of propaganda!!!”

facts, it seems the Chinese polled aren’t such “happy campers” as you purport. Seems to be a fair amount of dissatisfaction out there.

I am aware of Western propaganda. But it seems that you are practicing propaganda, too.

I concur with TahwYOJ in #98 and Wukailong in #111. Your demand to TahwYOJ in #104 seems to me in error. I don’t see where you have substantiated your position. IMHO, it is mere propaganda and opinion.

Pew reports are great. The last one I read on China is dated in July. If they do it again, there will be a lot of changes. If they do it in South China now with thousands of factories closing and housing values plunging, the changes will even be greater.

US still does not have bad feelings towards Jews and Muslims compared to EU. They’re smarter than US or we’re more forgiving? Do the Jews always convince the US congress to fight in the Middle East that we cannot afford?

Western myths;
Dalai lama is a buddhist leader – Only less than 1% of world buddhist know who is dalai lama, real buddhist don’t spend a lot of time in mingling with hollywood stars or washington racist or war mongers, or former colonialist whose wealth came from exploitation of third world countries.
Dalai lama is a peaceful person because he said so – He work for CIA openly from the 50’s to 70’s until its untenable. He lies about genocide at first, not succesful, then he twist it into cultural genocide while he send innocent kids to learn western culture, and they like it..

@facts: Wow, I’m impressed by the length it took you to express the following: the Western media simply is lying and is a propaganda machine; nothing you say will ever convince me of the opposite.

Some comments:

“This type of defence of Western media is standard, the devil is in the numbers.”

I didn’t know I did a standard defence, because I’ve rarely felt any need to defend the “Western media”. In fact, I tend to find it a megaphone of large, corrupt companies. However, I don’t believe in the conspiracy theories you are describing. If there is a bias or a skew, is it primarily against China? Is it a government order behind all of it? How is the rest of the Western world reported? You have chosen your pet theory without considering looking wider.

“The excuses you proposed are just excuses, there IS a willful determination to keep Western public misinformed and remain hostile to China by the Western media.”

Well, if you want to believe that, nobody will stop you. It just _is_ that way, because you and others said it. From the tone of the rest of your comment, I’m pretty sure you won’t consider any alternative viewpoint anyway.

“You are entitled to your opinion, but to reasonable minds, Western media has been and is on a propaganda campaign to demonize and dehumanize China.”

Haha, to unreasonable minds like me, the evil conspiracy of the Western media against China indeed seems far-fetched. I agree with you there is a bias, and an annoying one at that, but I just don’t believe what you and the “reasonable” camp believe.

“On Tibet, all I say is show me your facts to disbute mine.”

There is no such thing as your facts and my facts. What we can discuss is where you learned what you think are your facts, and where I learned what I think are mine – books, publication, documentation etc.

@FOARP
First off, I think I jumped on you too fast so I’m sorry for that. I call myself a liberal 🙂 but I don’t think I’m an idealistic liberal. I just see a lot of liberals take up what I call “convenient causes” and do what I think are unsubstantive actions that make them feel good, or make them feel like they are doing something historic. Some like:

People who went to Live 8 and think they are making a difference in poverty
People who go to Whole foods and think they are saving the environment
Mia Farrow calling out Coca Cola in regards to Darfur, even though Coke has done more directly to help the refugees in Darfur than Mia Farrow could in her life time.

Let me be clear, these are all legitimate issues, but just the way some people go about supporting these initiatives are just silly. I think I’m having a liberal identity crisis! But I digress, and I would agree when you called out ChinaTalk’s accusation of people hiding racism in Europe(e.g. antisemitism is well documented and reported).

@125 Wukailong
I am impressed by your defenseless defense as well. By calling what I have stated “conspiracy theory”, no need for any substance or logic to argue, all you need is calling up the two magical words “conspiracy theory.” Indeed you can stretch the two words “conspiracy theory” to the length of several paragraphs, very impressive.

Just one question how often the Pew Research results see the light of the day in Western media, compared to the run of the mill China-evil reports?

Go read that report, it tracked the satifaction rating on Chinese gov. in recent yrs not just 2008, the data exists from 2002 it was 48% and steadily climbed to 86%. Just because the outcome is off chart is no ground to question the vadilityof the data if the methods applied were consistant. Only reason you question such data is due to your personal bias.

On Tibet you can present you version of facts if you have them, so we can compare notes. But no you have nothing to present, so all you can do is attack.

While you guys are fighting for and against what this and that slimmy, slippery, wealthy politicians’ and religious double-talking slimebags said about this and that….knowing full well that they are all self-serving strategies, tactics and BS rhetorics, I am laughing at Cho’s observation of humanity & some good advices, like, “Don’t fxck with lesbians, not animal right activists, cos they’ll ….. and especially don’t argue with vegans, cos they are ….” Just say, “I am wrong, and run like hell… because vegans are…….”

SKC, where have you run to???? That was Cho’s vindication for you, the fillet mignon lover…LOL 🙂

I agree that there is no coordinated plan for west Media conspired against China. However, the bias is obviously there and it is very strong right now and media bias is commonly accepted notion even in the west. Just look at FOX News.

We need to understand that west journalists are in for business. They have to make a living. Ratings and readerships are their life-hood. So it’s not really about objectivity or fairness but a kind of “give the customer what they want” so to speak.

Major western powers are in a lot of trouble right now and their national esteem is very low. So this China’s economic success and raising power is not their cup-of-tea. It’s only naturally for them to pick on China. Jealousy is one of the strongest human emotions.

What makes them more difficult to accept is the fact that China succeeded under communist rule. This is a hard pill to swallow. They grow up and were told: – only democracy and capitalism can lead to economic prosperity. So you can image the level of resentment. China must have done something bad. That’s the only explanation. They can make cheap goods because they use child and prison labor. They compete unfairly because the government used unfair tactics. They must have stolen something, technology and resources. The list can go on and on.

Right now, this is the western sentiment towards China, a “mass psyche” if you will. Western media is part of that psyche and again they know what customer wants. So the feeding frenzy started. At the same time, Tibetans in exile, in a habit of telling sad and outrageous story, presented them as a perfect innocent and helpless sheep for the westerners to care and protect from evil red-China. It is a real good therapy for them.

That all fit well with westerners sense of rightfulness, their desire to be a hero against powerful but evil enemy in order to protect the weak and innocent. It all very nice and wonderful with the feeling they may have problem but they are good people.

This frenzy won’t last long. The reality has already kicked in. The raise of Russia as a new superpower, the terrorist attack on Mumbai, etc has reminded them that they have plenty of enemies and the day of western power domination on the world is numbered. It’s easy and fun to protest on the street about China human rights abuse but it will be hard and deadly when they face the real enemy with missiles and gun.

As a Chinese, I must say, we should take it easy and concentrate on economic development. When you have the money you can do anything. Let west attack, more the better. It will keep us humble and work hard. The one who laugh the last is the best.

William Huang #130 – I agree with everything you say. Especially: What makes them more difficult to accept is the fact that China succeeded under communist rule. This is a hard pill to swallow. They grow up and were told: – only democracy and capitalism can lead to economic prosperity. So you can image the level of resentment. China must have done something bad. That’s the only explanation. They can make cheap goods because they use child and prison labor. They compete unfairly because the government used unfair tactics. They must have stolen something, technology and resources. The list can go on and on.

What surprised me was that not one white person would stand up and say “hey, maybe China has its faults but it is trying”, but instead you get people like Sharon Stone’s Karma and Stephen Harper’s not going to trade human rights for the almighty Chinese buck yet turns around and say that the only way to improve the human rights situation in Columbia is have more trade with them. I was fairly neutral or even on the side of anti-China about 10 years ago, but when I see such double standards and hypocrisy in the Western media and governments, I start to stand back and say what is wrong with this picture. I am starting to think that maybe China is not that bad afterall, regardless whether it is communist or not. What is blatant disregard for justice is for the Western media to make up stories, absolute lies. And the more they lie, the more it pushes me to sympathize with China.

@William Huang (#130): Thanks, you give a picture that is mostly what I would have liked to communicate to “facts”. Western media bias is very real, it’s just this conspiracy theory with unbacked claims that get me going, a sort of obsession with the idea that the Chinese are singled out because of colonial reasons, when the fact of the matter is most probably that there are ideological entanglements that cause the bias. When people hear the word “communist” they assume China must be like the Soviet Union, without knowing that the party reformed itself and began using “capitalist” methods.

There is indeed a sort of opinion that only democracy can lead to all the good things of a society, which I believe is a sort of naive hope on some people’s part. These people really believe strongly in democracy, and just can’t understand why there is an Iraqi insurgence, for example.

I think the worry about a rising China is quite new. News reports used to be about human rights abuses and economic growth; now it’s also about the rising power in the region (and I have to say, more in-depth reporting).

@facts: I do accept your claims about media bias, just not your ideas about conspiracy. I’m just curious how you think it works – are there specific meetings where people (leaders of Western media) sit and discuss how to undermine China, and have charts on how successful they’ve been?

@jack: Well European leader will probably get used to the diplomatic relations with Chinese characteristics (sorry for the joke).
China is 100 times more menacing with Taïwan or Japan… they just don’t care, and economic relation are getting better.

Sounds logical to me, WKL. But then again, I am just a weak-minded, illogical Western devil. 😀 ::LMAO:: I wish I could be as smart as the “Supreme” facts thinks he/she is. (We used to talk about sportscaster Howard Cosell [of Muhammad Ali and ABC Sports fame] being “a legend in his own mind”.) But if I had such intelligence, I would not want to be the supremacist that he/she is. facts just lives in too small of a container. It would give me claustrophobia. 😀

#133

I’m just curious how you think it works – are there specific meetings where people (leaders of Western media) sit and discuss how to undermine China, and have charts on how successful they’ve been?

I hope that they are using PowerPoint and Live Meeting. 😀 ::LMAO::

—————-

facts, you are so predictable and boring. Kvetch, kvetch, kvetch. You behave and write like such a nebbish. To you I would say, “A bi gezunt!” The world owes you nothing. It owes me nothing.

It appears to me that you are exceptionally closed-minded, bitter and possibly hateful. I have encountered people like you before. Most of them are fundamentalist Muslims, Jews and Christians. You seem to have an overwhelming, insecure need to “always be right”. You will conjure up conspiracies, and ignore data, information and knowledge which doesn’t fit inside the workings of your “small mind”. Again, these are just my impressions. Then again, I am just a Western devil. An especially evil one because I am a Russian American Jew. And you know about us Jews? Right? Right? ::wink wink:: 😀

Your pernicious diatribes have made me reflect beyond the issues of “the Western Media portrayal of China”. (You have heard of “reflection”, haven’t you? I wonder after reading your diatribes.) While I grant you that China is not portrayed particularly well in the western Media, I wonder why that is. I will grant you that Westerners and Americans have biases. But why?

In my own life, I have noted my own xenophobia and that of others. Generally, contact with another culture or strangers starts to break down the walls of xenophobia. I am not sure that would work in your case. The walls of your self-imposed prison seem pretty thick.

Let me bring up several concepts which I think are foreign to you: personal and national responsibility, and personal and national accountability. These concepts go both ways: they apply equally to you and me, they apply equally to China and the USA.

Much of the Western media has failed to paint a more expansive view of China. A few have succeeded, to varying degrees, such as Pew Research, Jacques Leslie, John Pomfret, Mother Jones Magazine, Xujun Eberlein, James Reynolds of the BBC, the China Media Project at University of HK’s Journalism Centre, China Digital Times at UC Berkeley’s Graduate School of Journalism, MIT’s research into Chinese coal-fired plants, just to name a few. The Western media is responsible and accountable for their biases and misreporting, for whatever reason.

Now, let’s put the shoes on Chinese feet for a bit. China has an authoritarian government. They censor the internet. They openly monitor their internet, protecting it with a “Golden Shield”. China has a very propagandistic, controlled media. The massive CCTVization of Shenzhen. China is not “transparent”; it is opaque. Censorship seems to proliferate. China has massive manufacturing quality control issues, which they tend to hide from the rest of Asia and the West. We had very limited or no access to Tibet in March. This is just the tip of the iceberg.

What it boils down to is trust. I trust that which is transparent and open. If you aren’t transparent and open, I ask, “What are the Chinese trying to hide? Why are they lying to us?” I believe that many Westerners hold the same feelings about Chinese opacity and closedness. Thus many Westerners and I don’t trust China. Our media tends to dismiss news from Chinese media for that very reason. We have many more freedoms than China. We grew up with those freedoms. Thus, when we see a repressive, authoritarian, opaque government which censors and controls its people, we naturally are puzzled by and distrust the Chinese. It is just plain old acculturation.

So, if you want a fairer Western media exposure, I would suggest that you, facts, and the rest of the Chinese, become more transparent and open. You are responsible for part of this mess. It is time for you, facts, and the Chinese to be accountable.

I am not saying that this will be easy. But I don’t see other options. Help us break down the prison walls of xenophobia which exist both in China, Asia and the West. Just one foreign devil’s comments and request.

—————-

#128

facts, it is just an opinion study. Fortunately or unfortunately, it has little relevance to most Westerners. They are busy living their lives. I am sorry if Westerners don’t regularly contemplate the “glory of all that is China”. What do you expect?

I read the whole report. I doubt that you did. Maybe I am wrong.

You wrote, “Go read that report, it tracked the satifaction rating on Chinese gov. in recent yrs not just 2008, the data exists from 2002 it was 48% and steadily climbed to 86%.” Here is why I don’t think that you read well. In #122 I wrote,

These findings represent a dramatic improvement in national contentment from earlier in the decade when the Chinese people were not nearly as positive about the course of their nation and its economy.

You wrote:

Just because the outcome is off chart is no ground to question the validity of the data if the methods applied were consistent. Only reason you question such data is due to your personal bias.

The Chinese score is over 3 standard deviations from the mean; it is in the outside 11% of the population of scores. Which means it is a statistical outlier, and it bears additional examination and investigation.

You ignored all of the other Pew data about Chinese dissatisfaction. How convenient for you! 😀

I have not written about Tibet, because I know very little. (BTW, that is more openness and honesty on my part than I will ever see from you.) But based on Wukailong’s and TahwYOJ’s reasonableness, openness and transparency, I presently concur with their interpretations. I do not trust you at all, for all the reasons cited above.

You might try some arguments with the benefit of the thought process next time. Just a suggestion. 😀 ::LOL::

Agreed. I just like to point out one more thing: – People in China should be careful not falling into this victimization mentality. For all China has achieved in the past 20 years, the lighting speed in economic development, the space program, the Olympics, etc, etc, is it because Chinese are victim of western power? If not, why then, China is victim of western power now. So if the west media wants to put down on China let them do it. Let’s not overreacting and overly sensitive. We have show them that we are big boy now and we are not afraid little Chihuahua no more.

@facts: What did you think of coverage of the Sichuan earthquake in the international media? How would you compare the coverage of the Sichuan quake to the coverage of Hurricane Katrina? If you notice, as long as the media is granted access and answers are forthcoming, coverage is generally balanced. In Sichuan, as soon as reports started asking questions about the schools, access was cut off, reports were muffled, and… surprise… western media turned negative again.

Bias? Yes and I think the above situation just bought China another 6 months of negative coverage. For those who argue that it’s all western propaganda why can’t you also consider that the “western” media’s practices simply don’t work in China. I’m tired of being thrown back on my heels by accusations of propaganda when no one will acknowledge that right now China just doesn’t want serious investigative journalism.**

In 97 you said: “The ignorance of Western public on the knowledge of China being a multi-ethnic country is precisely the result of the half-truth misleading Western media reports.”

Why does the west portray China as a homogenous group? When differentiating between the government and the people or between various ethnic groups on a negative issue “the west” is accused of trying to split China. When lumping everyone together “the west” is accused of misrepresenting China’s diversity. Cafferty had a lawsuit filed against him stating his remark about “Chinese” was racist and here you are venting that westerners don’t recognize China’s ethnic diversity. I think the Chinese reaction to the Tibet coverage was reasonable -in some instances- but now it seems to be applied any time a negative report about China appears. This song is getting a little tired.

**”China” in this paragraph refers to China as a single homogeneous entity.

I had earlier seen the CMP article on those foreign devils in the Belgian TV Crew. 😀 ::shaking my head:: But, Ted, the Xinhua version must be right? After all, if it is in Xinhua, it has to be the empirical truth. Right? (At least teleologically speaking) 😀 ::LOL:: Thanks for the other 2 links.

Regarding Sichuan, I remember when the Chinese government shut off the foreign press. I also remember when the police attacked the protesting parents, grieving parents who had just lost their precious children. I also remember reports of school buildings being quickly demolished so as to prevent forensic investigation of why so many classrooms collapsed.

Then I also remember James Reynolds’ reports of how the Chinese government moved pollution monitoring stations in Beijing so they could lower/re-jigger the pollution data. Now there is a method for cleaning up pollution.

facts, given the choice, who do you think I will believe? Bandurski? Xinhua? China Daily? Or the government officials from the province. I will go with Bandurski, FCCC and the Belgian crew any day. They have credibility. The other three don’t have credibility with me; can you say, “cover-up”? When was the last time that Xinhua or China Daily did a good journalistic exposé or a good piece of investigative journalism?

Ted, personally I don’t know or care much about knowing the details of the ethnic groups in China. I understand that they exist. Most of what I know about the ethnic groups I have learned at FM. And I am not being anti-Chinese if I don’t know or make a mistake. To me, those Chinese who are hypersensitive come across to me as hyper-insecure. facts fits into this group, IMHO.

I don’t expect foreigners to know the fine points of American or Jewish culture. How many Chinese know between observant and non-observant Jews? How many can distinguish between ultra-orthodox, orthodox, conservative, liberal, reform, Hasidic, renewal and humanistic Jews? How about the Torah, Talmud and Kabbalah? And if a Chinese person makes a mistake, it is not anti-Semitism. It is a mistake, for crying out loud. That is all. Some Chinese need thicker skins and some chutzpah! Get a grip on it, guys and gals. 😀

I agree with your assessment that China is partially responsible for the west media bias and China do need more openness and democratic. That said, I don’t agree some of your conclusions.

Jerry said:
Let me bring up several concepts which I think are foreign to you: personal and national responsibility, and personal and national accountability. These concepts go both ways: they apply equally to you and me, they apply equally to China and the USA.

William Huang:
You made a connection between the personal and national on responsibility and accountability. Let me ask you a question: you as an individual American, are you personally responsible for hundreds and thousands of innocent Iraqi people killed in the Iraq War? If not, why not?

Jerry said:
We grew up with those freedoms. Thus, when we see a repressive, authoritarian, opaque government which censors and controls its people, we naturally are puzzled by and distrust the Chinese. It is just plain old acculturation.

William Huang:
Not every American grows up with those freedoms as you are speaking of. It was just 40 years ago. An African-American living in South did not grow up with these freedoms. The rights that all men are created equal did not apply to them. Discrimination and suppression against colored people was guaranteed by the constitution of many states. Talking about repressive governments! Was there any transparency back then?

Jerry said:
What it boils down to is trust. I trust that which is transparent and open. If you aren’t transparent and open, I ask, “What are the Chinese trying to hide? Why are they lying to us?” I believe that many Westerners hold the same feelings about Chinese opacity and closedness. Thus many Westerners and I don’t trust China. Our media tends to dismiss news from Chinese media for that very reason.

William Huang:
Yes, all that transparency and openness is live and well in US because of democracy. You have check and balance. You have human rights and freedom. It’s good for you and great. But what does it have anything to do with other countries? Let’s say I am an Iraqi and living in Iraq what all these wonderful things you are talking about have anything to do with me? Is there any transparency from my end of story to your side? Do you really care?

In current Iraq War, every US casualty is counted for. Do you know how many innocent children were killed? Has media ever reported that? If you agree that media is biased on this issue too, then, should Iraqi people take some blame for the lack of transparency?

This is the problem of your argument. You are confusing your individual experience (democracy, freedom, etc) in your own country with someone else experience about your country. The same applies to the media. The media in your country is good for you but is it really good for Chinese? Is media hold accountable for their reporting equally for both domestic and international affair?

You brought up quality problem in Chinese products. I don’t understand what’s the big deal? There are product-recalls all the time in US. I hope you are not saying that there is no fraud and cheating in US.

With all the problems and shortcomings that China has, and the lack of transparency and openness, it has done no harm to any other countries for the past 40 years. For millions of Vietnamese and tens of thousands Iraqi killed in the unjust wars started by the US and for the complacency of its citizens. I seriously doubt that people in the US really concerned about people of China and their freedom, human right, etc.

But what should you care? You are not living in China. My point here is that unless you think from both sides, this wall of xenophobia will always be there. So not only the west media, Chinese media, Chinese people should be blamed but you as individual too.

My foreign friends, whenever they disagreed with me would say some dumbass
things like, “Well, you are a Chinese.” My Chinese friends on the other hand would
tell me I am not Chinese enough. Um, so who’s right?

Oh well, at least, I KNOW I am right, though. 🙂

I love America. And I love China. I enjoy living in China.
America is great – from a distance that is, far away enough where you can’t hear the constant complaining from people who have everything. The anal PC-ness, the racism, the paranoia, the in-your-face hypocracy, hype and hubris.

This born-in-the-USA star of “All American girl,” here was told,
“She’s not Asian enuff…” It’s really really funny sh*t –
[but only when it is presented on stage as a standup comedy act, I bet.]

Thanks for the reply. Basically, my argument was directed to facts. Thus I simplified my points. If you have read my posts here at FM, I am a much more complex thinker and writer. With someone like facts, you have to start simple. To WKL, SK, Steve, HKer, bt, Allen, admin, and others here I can write differently.

Actually, regarding the concepts of accountability and responsibility on personal and national levels, there exists some connection between the personal and national. Obviously, my personal issues usually differ from national issues, much the same for the Chinese and Iraqis. Occasionally, there arises an opportunity to deal with national and global issues on a local, personal basis. “Think globally, act locally.” That is why I made the statement.

Am I responsible for all the killings in Iraq. Hardly. But I have a responsibility to deal on a personal level as the opportunity arises. And I do. The same goes for the Israeli government’s (I am Russian Jewish American) mistreatment of Palestinians and Arabs in the West Bank, Gaza and Lebanon. So I hold myself accountable, to the degree of my opportunity..

I am well aware of the persecution of my own people and our suffering. My dad suffered prejudice (nothing like it would have been in Russia) in Cincinnati. I know that African Americans, Native Americans/Indians, and other minorities have suffered, too. Many of the African Americans suffered through generations of slavery and horrible racism and intolerance. That I know. BTW, many African Americans suffered much in the North, too.

I truly treasure transparency and openness. When I encounter the opposite, I am very skeptical and suspicious. I believe that a number of Americans are like this. And I believe that Americans in the media, for the most part, have the same reaction. And for good reason. That is my point.

How the Chinese and others wish to comport themselves, I can’t control. But as you may know, there are many comments here about the “unfair” Western media and its treatment of China. I was giving my perspective on Chinese responsibility for helping to create that phenomena.

“This is the problem of your argument.” No, I am not confusing my experience with an outsider’s experience. Much the same as I am not confusing my experience here in Taipei with a native Taiwanese. If you don’t like our Western media or the West, then there are some steps you can take to help remedy the situation. Westerners need to take some steps, too. If it matters to them. I can’t vouch one way or the other for my fellow Americans. I just represent me.

Regarding Iraq, I know that 100,000s of children died in our embargo/sanctioning of Iraq following the first war. I know that upwards of 1,000,000 innocent Iraqis have died in the second. Many millions more have had their lives disrupted, ruined and displaced. Many Americans work on our media all the time to be more open. It is very difficult with a media which has been consolidated into the hands of some huge corporations. But our media is still much freer than Chinese media.

Our media and presidency have had huge issues with misreporting Iraq and conducting a horrible war. Period.

“If you agree that media is biased on this issue too, then, should Iraqi people take some blame for the lack of transparency?” Huh? I must be missing something here. Makes no sense to me.

Yes, Americans have product recalls. We deal with these, both on an allopathic and a proactive basis. But, it seems that China has much more basic, much vaster issues with quality control. For instance, American steel experts are in China making sure that steel for the Oakland Bay Bridge repair is made properly. Unfortunately, when previously left to their own devices, the Chinese could not produce quality steel parts. Hence, the Americans came over. Fake or improperly manufactured heparin sold to Baxter. Fake anti-malarials sold to SE Asian countries. Poisoned dumplings sold to Japan through JT. Melamine, melamine, melamine and cyanuric acid in milk products, eggs and animal feed. Lead in the paint on many toys sold to the West. These and many more. This speaks to the trust issue again. Americans are right to be suspicious of Chinese products.

America and China both have many sins. There is more than enough blame to go around. But your claim of no harm to other countries. Regarding no harm to other countries, your support for the murderous bastards in Burma, propping up their illegal government, has damaged, harmed and killed many Burmese. Your support for Pol Pot (and yes I know that the American government condoned it too, but we are talking about China here) helped kill over 1,000,000 Khmer. Thanks China.

I have many Vietnamese friends and we have discussed the American war very much. I am sickened about the damage and death we wrought on the Vietnamese. I personally have opposed the war in Iraq long before we attacked.

“I seriously doubt that people in the US really concerned about people of China and their freedom, human right, etc.” Again, huh? I did not bring this up. How would you know this, or is this just a very cynical throw-away line on your part? Methinks so.

But what should you care? You are not living in China. My point here is that unless you think from both sides, this wall of xenophobia will always be there. So not only the west media, Chinese media, Chinese people should be blamed but you as individual too.

I don’t think xenophobia needs to always exist. To solve xenophobia, both sides must work at it. It will take time. It is not easy to resolve. I am personally accountable. Are you? You talk blame. I talk accountability. As I said earlier, “There is more than enough blame to go around.” If you want to play the “blame” game, we will get nowhere.

As I said earlier, in regards to reducing xenophobia, and increasing openness and transparency, “I am not saying that this will be easy. But I don’t see other options. Help us break down the prison walls of xenophobia which exist both in China, Asia and the West. Just one foreign devil’s comments and request.”

We can make a better world, work for that aim or we can make lots of excuses. Your choice.

you as an individual American, are you personally responsible for hundreds and thousands of innocent Iraqi people killed in the Iraq War? If not, why not?

Umm, maybe because he didn’t pull the trigger and/or back the war to the hilt and say “get busy, guys!”??

Not every American grows up with those freedoms as you are speaking of. It was just 40 years ago.

Sorry, 40 years ago was the past. America has MOVED ON. When people criticise the Cultural Revolution, the automatic fenqing response is “OMG, that was ages ago! You China-bashers are ignoring the change China has undergone!!!!” They’ll even bring this up in the context of the 1989 massacre.

Do you know how many innocent children were killed? Has media ever reported that?

Do you know? The American media isn’t the only one out there. But, if you want to know, the US media does report when civilians are killed. The problem is that when the violence was at its worst there were no official figures because they couldn’t be calculated (if there are no bodies). However the US media did report on the severity of the violence. You can’t ask them to do more in such a situation. Remember that a number of American publications condemned the war either before or after the invasion.

The media in your country is good for you but is it really good for Chinese?

You think sweeping China’s problems under the carpet is good for Chinese? Pushing government propaganda is good for Chinese? That’s what much of the Chinese media does.

With all the problems and shortcomings that China has, and the lack of transparency and openness, it has done no harm to any other countries for the past 40 years.

First, the Vietnamese would have something to say about that. Second, even if you are correct plenty of pain has been dealt out to Chinese in those last 40 years so I don’t see where you’re going with this.

+++

More generally, I think Peter’s thread is terrible. It looks like it was written by a five-year old – the reasoning is little better.

Basically, China supported EU as a cohesive entity for many years but got nothing in return.

Except for backing China over almost any issue concerning Taiwan? Hundreds of billions of dollars in investment for China?

Also, I’m not sure how China “supported” the EU as a cohesive entity, or if it did how it made a difference. Perhaps China thought that a “strong” EU would help it counter-balance the US, but if it did that’s its own misjudgment.

Some little country in EU could veto anything and didn’t need to bear any consequence.

What a simplistic load of nonsense. The EU has qualified majority voting for a lot of issues, and the smaller states rarely use their remaining vetoes by themselves.

EU has only itself to blame.

No, China has only itself to blame by assuming that the foreign policy of all EU states could be bought. If Chinese policies are sovereign and not subject to external “meddling”, why is the same not true of other countries?

Hmm….Good retort (#142) Jerry, to a William H’s good retort (#139 to Jerry’s # 135)

I wonder if “facts” is really writing from what he / she feels….Thing is a lot of the dirty tricks and irrational things that go down in America do seem / appear / make sense when explained through Conspiracy theories. The thing is, Conspiracy theories USUALLY come from highly -educated, independant-thinking Americans like PhDs, professors, Engineering Specialists, the including geniuses like Noam Chompksy etc.

Take the whole 9 -11 WTC inside job / false flag conspiracy-to-go-to-war in Iraq allegations. I think the idea of inside job fowlplay was first raised by a reporter in Toronto. It doesn’t taske a genius to know that the three WTC buildings collapsed like controlled demolition fashion. Then there was the impossible trajectory of the Pantagon attacking flight path by some novice terrorist pilot, the rush to clean up and clear up ground zero, the finding of the terrorist passport among the plane wreckages…etc etc etc…But how the hell do you prove it in time to put war criminals in public offices on trial?

American media is no doubt freer than China’s. For starter, Americans have a lot more choices. Why many Americans (and Chinese) choose to watch CBS, CNN, ABC, Fox News is beyond me. American MSM are pro-Americana – Fxck ’em. Go watch and read something else. It’s a free world, esp those with internet accesses. Obviously, Jerry, WKL and Steve are better spending their time on better media and reading materials.

ChinkTalk Says: William Huang #130 – I agree with everything you say. Especially: What makes them more difficult to accept is the fact that China succeeded under communist rule. This is a hard pill to swallow. They grow up and were told: – only democracy and capitalism can lead to economic prosperity. So you can image the level of resentment. China must have done something bad. That’s the only explanation.

This is true. I think ChinkTalk is right, but only as a generalization. First off. Is China Communist? Yes…but. … It’s kinda like asking the question, are Roman Catholic Christians? Um, Yes. Are Protestants, Baptists, Anglicans, Episcopaleans, Seventh Day Adventists etc also Christians? Yeah. But, um….not exactly the “love thy enemies, do not worry about what you eat or wear for God takes care of even the little sparrow, be ready to be fed to the lions” poverty-fugitive-outcast type of pre-Constantine christianity, are they?

“My foreign friends, whenever they disagreed with me would say some dumbass
things like, “Well, you are a Chinese.” My Chinese friends on the other hand would
tell me I am not Chinese enough. Um, so who’s right?
Oh well, at least, I KNOW I am right, though. 🙂 ”

Agreed agreed agreed … I hate this categorization of the people ‘you’re too this’ or ‘not enough that’.

It’s funny, most of the things you say about USA can easily be put in the mouth of some French.
Add the redneck stereotype ‘hmm Hong Kong is a gorilla isn’t it?’ or ‘Yurop, is that close to Germany?’, and the stuff is complete 🙂

Most of times, I just feel like ‘hey give a break to America’ … most of the anti-USA crowd at home are just living on stereotypes, never went there, and anyway are SURE that they don’t like it.

Your last statement reminds me of Moore’s movie on American stereotyping of the Indian MD in socialistic Europe with the hot Audi A8 sedan, living in a beautiful big house. And then there’s the socialistic freedom of French and UK’s hosiptals and the genuine Cuban hospitality and medi-care charity. Haha.

Ok, I dunno if Michael was just pulling some of his compatriate’s legs, or are Europe and Cuba as wonderful as he’d portrayed them? I’ve been to parts of Europe. I loved every country I visited, but I was only there for a total of one month, so, I was still in the honeymoon mindset when I left. My good Chinese friend immigrated to Germany two years ago. He loves it there.

Here in China, they say, if you are bleeding to death in the hospital without enough money with you, the medical staff will not help you. Touch wood, may I never be stuck in such miserable heartless situation. I went to the Beijing Hospital in Shenzhen to get my tooth fixed, except for the lack of manners from the patients, the nurses and doctors were fine. In fact, tons of HK folks cross the border everyday for dental work in Shenzhen because they are many times cheaper. The facilities and equipment are ultra-modern too.

As an aside, but also something that pertains to the discussion, I want to describe what I felt when Beijing got the right to organize the Olympics back in 2001. I stayed with a Chinese friend back then and after seeing the results on TV, we ran out into the night to buy some erguotou and celebrate. Fireworks began sounding and old men and women danced to drum music, while young people were out in restaurants eating lamb sticks and drinking beer. It was a great atmosphere. What really moved me, though, was the enormity of the thing: it really felt like China had been accepted and chosen for a great honor.

Many of the things we live by are symbolic, and this for me was on the same level as Obama’s election: technically it might not bring any change, but it is an important change of vision for the world, a change for openness.

This is one of the cases where I did feel disappointed by most Western media outlets during the time, and during the opening of the games as well. As an example, one of the Swedish channels showing the opening ceremony had a reporter who would say the most bizarre things, like “here are the regime’s soldiers” and “Confucianism is the state religion of China.” Luckily he had a reporter living in Beijing by his side that would protest the worst things.

When I grew up, the political classes at school basically told us that there are good democracies and bad dictatorships. People have internalized this world view and it colors the way journalists and ordinary people think. While I think China deserves a lot of the criticism it gets, it is only fair that it also gets praise for all the things that have happened the last 30 years. For all the problems we might see, reforms and opening up have been a success story unparallelled in modern history.

Somehow the angry nationalists are just a mirror image of the worst China-bashers. We can do better. Anyone that really cares about a country should value both positive and negative input.

(I hope this doesn’t sound terribly PC… But after all the muckraking of this discussion, I felt like saying it. 🙂 )

Yes, you’re right. In French, we say ‘ the grass always looks greener in your neighbor’s field’.
I mean, USA is far from perfect, but I don’t really see the point in always criticizing it or blindly supporting it.
It’s just like projecting your dreams/nightmares on a country that does not exist anyway.

Yes, right, we also say ‘it always looks nicer in your neighbor’s plate’
I would assume it’s the human nature.

For somewhat strange reasons, I always felt a connexion between China and France.
You see, both countries had a Revolution (and the aftermath: the Terror is quite similar to the CR), are super-proud (to the point it can become arrogance) of their culture, have a passion for History and Literature, are not very religious, are considered ‘female countries’, and have a love/hate relationship with the ‘Anglo-Saxon’ world.

Well, Michael Moore is not very objective … in ‘Sicko’, when he visits a French family in Paris, it’s obviously an upper class family.
It’s not as wonderful as he says … more precisely, he’s just focusing on some points to criticize USA.
It reminds me of the right people here in France that always criticize Europe because ‘you cannot do what you want, there are too many rules’. They always say ‘USA this’, ‘USA that’ …
Finally, it’s just liberal or conservative lenses.
I know a guy living and working in USA (a French citizen) … he has a very good salary, but when he needs some health care, it’s cheaper for him to take a plane to Paris and to go to the hospital there (huh!).

@Charles Liu – However ‘The Tibetans’ (by which I presume you mean . . . actually, I have no idea who you mean, but I guess you mean the Dalai Lama and his followers) are not at all embarassed to see their spiritual leader meeting the leader of country that opposed the invasion of Iraq – wasn’t that the whole point of this post? Meanwhile, Sinn Fein representatives have travelled to many countries either as party representatives or in their capacity as members of the Northern Irish Assembly, as members of the European Parliament, or as part of the Irish Dail. However, Gerry Adams himself has only ever met one person who could be called a Chinese political representative – the Dalai Lama!

@Facts – It is easy to make statements about Western Media being ‘propaganda, plain and simple’, your problem comes when you actually look at what the western media really says about China, reslity does not support what you say – but then reality does have a well known anti-China bias.

@Admin – Could you please explain why 132 is highlighted? Here’s a little run-down of what’s wrong with that comment:

1) France holds the presidency of the council of Europe, one of the three major European bodies (the Commission, the Council, and the Court of Justice), but this does not mean that Sarkozy is ‘President’ of the EU – the EU does not have a president.

2) The nearest the EU has to a ‘president’ is Jose Manuel Barroso – President of the European Commission, however, nobody has suggested that Chinese officials should not meet with him.

3) A French presidency of the EU merely means that France hosts and arranges the meeting of the European Council during the period from July to December this year – no special powers above and beyond this are bestowed by the presidency. The presidency is not elected, but is on a rolling basis, so for the first six months of next year the Czech Republic will hold the presidency, and the Sweden will hold it for another six months, and then Spain – and so on, with all the member states of the EU taking turns to hold the presidency for a six month period. Nobody is suggesting that this ‘boycott’ should continue past the end of the French presidency, even though French officials will be present at all of these events.

4) Can the commenter actually point to something said by Sarkozy to explain what is meant by ‘fighting words’? Or is he/she just being pointlessly aggressive on the internet – something which hardly needs highlighting, nor is particularly special or informative?

@ all to whom it may concern
What’s so funny about the responses to my posts is that those Westerner all resorted to the same, what I call, a straw-man tactic. Making up a straw-man, and say that’s my opponent, then beat up on the straw-man and declear victory.

In all my posts, did I ever mention “meetings” “charts” or even “powerpoints”? I really don’t know who is making fun of whom. What I did was to offer a candid observation of Western media reporting on China, and asked a few questions as to why such gross misrepresentation has persisted over time and no improvements (easily implementable) has ever made. I procede to conclude, such practice is willful and intentional, and in fact can be called a propaganda campaign. Indeed, no one really questioned my observation of western media practice, other than arguing about the validity of Pew Research results. It was those Westerners who jumped guns and concluded that a “coordinated campaign” has been carried out based on such observation I offered. Then much effort has been spent on denying such “cordinated campaign” exists and find excuses for the white lies Western media have been chruning out in ever large amouints, as if calling me “close minded” “Muslim foundamentalist” can prove their point.

Even after all the crimes the Bush administration has committed, many Americans still sense the moral superiority once those Americans believe they have resoundedly denounced the Bush/Chaney cabal. Firstly it’s the America/Western so-called democracy institutions that produced and sustained such administration for the past 8 yrs at the great cost of global community. So the institutions themselves are questionable. That aside, my observation and citicism of the preceived “freer” Western press, really pulled the fig-leaf off that naked propaganda machine–that is the free press. Its on-going intentional and willful gross mispresentation of the facts on China to the Western public is plain and simple for every reasonable human being to see. Such practice can not be excused as bias, it can be called nothing but willful propaganda. That must be a very painful truth. Many westerner can take criticism toward their gov. but always believe their media as “biased” as it is, is still the pillar of western civilization. I am here to tell them, the Western media is nothing but a very sophisticated lie machine. It has no intention to report the truth at least when it comes to China.

I know some will argue with me Western media is not funded by gov. so by definition is technically not propaganda. Yet, such petty technicality does not change the result a bit, at the end of day, the public is brainwashed to believe a lie or a fantacy if you will.

Now to address those concerns if a “cordinated” propaganda campaign exists in Western media, how many “meetings” held, in which “charts” are presented and rounded up with fancy “powerpoints”? My answer is I have no idea, I simply don’t know. You may conclude yes or no. I only offer observations that can be verified by reading every day publications. Given the intensity of misinformation that bombards media every day, it does qualify as a campaign.

Just like Chinatalk and William Huang pointed out, the fear of the West to see its “democratic” institutions lose the compitition with the “evil” communism is at the heart of such a propaganda campaign. Especially in light of the recent global financial fiasco originated in the West, and pulled down the rest of the world with it. Desperate to fend criticism, western media can only resort to more and more gross misrepresentation to demonize China, just like in a political campaign only endless and consolidated by the left/right.

Regardless of the success of the China model over the yrs, and the support of Chinese people. Western media would deny at every opportunity the legitimacy of the CCP gov. and Chinese institutions overtly or subtly. All challenge to Chinese authority domestic or foreign is rationalized, legitimized and encouraged. Such is the essense of Western reporting on China.

Some had called me “hateful”, indeed I am, hateful of lies and disgusted with hypocracy, even I have no ill feelings to any individual.

“Is that comment really the best of this blog or something the staff thing is admirable? If so, no wonder this place gets trashed from time-to-time.”

Hey, folks…I’d asked Admin to highlight those comments – not because I agree with them or that they are the best comments – This is NOT a competition – THESE ARE NOT JUST the thoughts of these individual people, I have heard and read other people said similar things. By Highlighting them will hopefully attract attentions and hence more participation in discussion, and hopefully everyone learns and un-learn something each time.

Jerry, Steve, WKL & bt usually exhibit very good logic, high IQ & EQ…They are a lot of time both Right and Nice with their deliveries…I love their arguments, and admire their composures, but at the same time I respect sincere comments & opinions – I trust FM admin too – I believe William Huang’s and ‘facts’ last retorts are just as enlightening to others. Your informed comments are most welcomed – please leave the judgementalism at the door.

As for FM “getting trashed,” I have seen very blittle of that. I used to visit PKD, I can understand the envy. I feel, We simply have a different history, spirit, rapport, and attitude here at FM.

Ops, I am sorry….I left out FOARP’s very good 3 point comment and a Question re: #132.

Certainly agree with Jerry’s ” I don’t think xenophobia needs to always exist. To solve xenophobia, both sides must work at it. It will take time. It is not easy to resolve.”

WKL’s “When I grew up, the political classes at school basically told us that there are good democracies and bad dictatorships. People have internalized this world view and it colors the way journalists and ordinary people think. While I think China deserves a lot of the criticism it gets, it is only fair that it also gets praise for all the things that have happened the last 30 years. For all the problems we might see, reforms and opening up have been a success story unparallelled in modern history.”

@bt’s

“Finally, it’s just liberal or conservative lenses.
I know a guy living and working in USA (a French citizen) … he has a very good salary, but when he needs some health care, it’s cheaper for him to take a plane to Paris and to go to the hospital there (huh!).” LOL. 🙂

FOARD says that “this does not mean that Sarkozy is ‘President’ of the EU – the EU does not have a president.”

Well somebody better tell Sarkozy, because he “wants to advance the EU’s action in all the main areas, particularly those pertaining to society, the economy, finance and culture, and on an international level.

In order to meet these challenges and to serve the general European interest, the French Presidency will need the support and engagement of everyone. You can count on my determination to make this presidency a presidency that is useful for Europe and for the Europeans.”

So we will call him the gang leader of the EU and not President, that sounds better. Now how can this little nobody from Franch talk for the EU and make such a big mess of things on the China- EU relations and get away with it?

The EU gang leader can do whatever he please and don’t get blamed for it, that’s nice but not right.

By Highlighting them will hopefully attract attentions and hence more participation in discussion, and hopefully everyone learns and un-learn something each time.

Well I don’t think that would be apparent to anyone visiting this blog for the first time – I haven’t exactly arrived here this week and I was under the impression highlights were “good posts”.

If posts are going to be highlighted because they’re loony it’s necessary for that to be indicated, otherwise visitors will assume you’re congratulating intolerance – with all due respect to yourself and the blog.

“highlighted because they’re loony it’s necessary for that to be indicated, otherwise visitors will assume you’re congratulating intolerance..”.

Hmmm…you ‘ve got a point there, Raj…I didn’t think of that…but then, I don’t think the highlighted posts are loony, though. Infact, I think vmoore55 is very well-informed., William Huang is right in many points and WKL is very level-headed….All the same, thanks for the advice, Raj.

Nobody, you think that Sarkozy is speaking as President of the European Union (i.e. for all European states) and that “he was pissing on China’s rug for all to see and he wants everbody to know about it”?

I am very impressed with your reply. You are very honest and open for discussion to the point of objectivity that’s rarely being seen. I want to thank you.

I do want respond one of your question and make some counter point on some of your comments.

You question first:
“If you agree that media is biased on this issue too, then, should Iraqi people take some blame for the lack of transparency?” Huh? I must be missing something here. Makes no sense to me

William Huang:
I apologize for not being clear. My point here is: if western media had biased report on the matter of Iraq War, should Iraq people take some blame? I made this because you think China should take as much blame for the bias reporting as western media.

Jerry said:
Yes, Americans have product recalls. We deal with these, both on an allopathic and a proactive basis. But, it seems that China has much more basic, much vaster issues with quality control.

William Huang:

I would agree if you are talking about Japanese but not Americans. You statement of American deal with it on an allopathic and proactive basis is completely untrue. Have you ever heard of Enron and WorldCom? Let me give you a recent example to make my point.

I am sure you are aware of current worldwide financial crisis. Do you know it started? It is all started in US. It started out by something called sub-prime mortgage and its pure US doing and it is taking the world down with it. This is by no means an accident. It all comes from pure greed coupled with unethical behavior by a large number of people, mainly banking and financial institutions. Along with government knowingly did nothing, they repeatedly ignored warnings and internal objections but taking more and more risks without any consideration to the consequences. As the whole thing started to collapse, what did they do? They hided it until the last minutes.

Where is this allopathic and proactive base are you talking about?

It would be okay if this is just happen to US but it’s not. These sub-prime MBS were sold whorl-wide and don’t cry for America. Yes, American tax payer and some investors have to foot some bills but the US home owners and financial institutions in teh US are the ones who made bundles on inflated housing price and profits.

So this transparency and openness does no help for the rest of world. Not only they ended up with a bunch of worthless paper but the whole world economy is being dragged into. If you want to compare the amount of damage that Chinese product quality to this sub-prime crisis, you will be comparing distance between from your home to your high school and from the earth to the moon.

I do agree that American products have much better quality than Chinese product. However, it has nothing to do openness and transparency. It has a lot to do with technology, experience, consumer demand, and living standard.

Most importantly, the whole concept of capitalist is based on self-interest. This is what China has learned from US. It is this self-interest drives the motivation, desire and eventually the prosperity. There will always be some people who walking on the edge and breaking the law. It happens everywhere everyday. China is no more and no less than anyone else.

You mix apple and orange together to demonstrate that China is lacking in honesty. To look for a bone in an egg, you bring a quality issue as a moral issue. This is exactly the problem with western media and the west sentiment. Every little mistake made is magnified 10 times.

Let me give you an example, years ago, a guy bought some useless land in Arizona and then divided them into 12” x 12” square pieces for tens of thousands property deeds. Then he went to China and sold for $100 a piece by telling Chinese that you can get green card if you own a piece of land in US. This crock made millions. Forbes magazine had an article on him and the title is “Selling American Dream”. The writer put the whole affair as though he is doing Chinese a favor by giving them a dream. Article like this is an insult to Chinese people not transparency.

Jerry said,
America and China both have many sins. There is more than enough blame to go around. But your claim of no harm to other countries. Regarding no harm to other countries, your support for the murderous bastards in Burma, propping up their illegal government, has damaged, harmed and killed many Burmese. Your support for Pol Pot (and yes I know that the American government condoned it too, but we are talking about China here) helped kill over 1,000,000 Khmer. Thanks China.

William Huang:
I agree that China has its sins but it is in no comparison to US. Vietnam and Iraq war aside, yes, China has supported terrible regime but so is US. Let me give you two examples to make my points. Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden were all US own creations. It is US who supported Saddam Hussein regime and allow him to kill millions of his own people. When these monsters got out of hand, US then sent troops to eliminate them. Do you have any idea the devastation and instability that US has brought to just to create these two monsters? But who is counting? I am only referring to armed invasions and I am not allocating Saddam Hussein’s crime on US.

Jerry said,
“I seriously doubt that people in the US really concerned about people of China and their freedom, human right, etc.” Again, huh? I did not bring this up. How would you know this, or is this just a very cynical throw-away line on your part? Methinks so.

I don’t think xenophobia needs to always exist. To solve xenophobia, both sides must work at it. It will take time. It is not easy to resolve. I am personally accountable. Are you? You talk blame. I talk accountability. As I said earlier, “There is more than enough blame to go around.” If you want to play the “blame” game, we will get nowhere.

William Huang:
I can assure you, unlike other places around the world, US as a country is still very much admired and Americans are very well respected in China. I don’t think you can provide any evidence that this respect is reciprocated. To break down the wall, I think the ball is at your court.

Raj said:
you as an individual American, are you personally responsible for hundreds and thousands of innocent Iraqi people killed in the Iraq War? If not, why not?
Umm, maybe because he didn’t pull the trigger and/or back the war to the hilt and say “get busy, guys!”??

William Huang:
Well, Jerry is personally responsible. It is Jerry who raised bar on personal responsibility in connection with the national responsibility not me. However, at that level, I do agree that we all are personally responsible for the action and the consequence of our government. This is especially so for Jerry, as an American. He and his fellow Americans have the freedom to chose their government and have the power to stop their government’s wrong doings. Collectively, as people, they failed on Iraq War. They voted the same government twice with the war in between. There is not way Jerry can walk away from that and he cannot have it both ways. They have to accept the consequence. I do appreciate Jerry’s courage to accept the accountability.

Raj said:
Not every American grows up with those freedoms as you are speaking of. It was just 40 years ago.
Sorry, 40 years ago was the past. America has MOVED ON. When people criticise the Cultural Revolution, the automatic fenqing response is “OMG, that was ages ago! You China-bashers are ignoring the change China has undergone!!!!” They’ll even bring this up in the context of the 1989 massacre.

William Huang:
Well again, Jerry brought that issue when he said “We grew up with those freedoms”. I assumed the word “we” means all Americans. I just want to point to him, that statement is not exactly true followed by examples. As for your ranting on Culture Revolution, I suppose some Chinese pissed you off. I am sorry I wasn’t there so you just have to eat it.

Raj said:
Do you know how many innocent children were killed? Has media ever reported that?
Do you know? The American media isn’t the only one out there. But, if you want to know, the US media does report when civilians are killed. The problem is that when the violence was at its worst there were no official figures because they couldn’t be calculated (if there are no bodies). However the US media did report on the severity of the violence. You can’t ask them to do more in such a situation. Remember that a number of American publications condemned the war either before or after the invasion.

William Huang:
When I say western media, I never meant US only.

Western media did report civilian casualties, but usually the civilians not killed by American armed forces. Examples, they do report how many people killed by a suicide bomber. I meant specifically how many children were killed by US bombing, ground attack, raid, etc.

Yes, I agree that these numbers are hard to get and I have no problem for western media not reporting it. However, I do have problem with western media for what they did on March riot in Tibet. They use Nepal’s police arrest picture to show a “police brutality”. They pointed an ambulance as an arrest vehicle. A police saved a boy from mob and they captioned as a police arresting a boy. Yes, if Chinese government has been more open, the picture may have been clear, but this does not justified for false information.

Yes, I agree that there are some dissident voices there but even then, the majority of them have more practical concerns about US as country in terms the economic consequence, the US casualty, the US influence. I have not seen an article addressing the well being of Iraqi people for their sake, not some propaganda that they can vote now and school is open, etc.

Raj said:
The media in your country is good for you but is it really good for Chinese?
You think sweeping China’s problems under the carpet is good for Chinese? Pushing government propaganda is good for Chinese? That’s what much of the Chinese media does.

William Huang:
I am not sure what are you talking about here. I am referring to Jerry’s comments that
American likes their media. My argument is that what it has anything to do Chinese?
Let me use an analog. If Jerry said; “In the west, we enjoyed beef and it has been good for me.” Me as a vegetarian and that’s’ all I can afford, says: “Well, it’s good for you, but what does it have anything to do with me?”

As for China, I agree with Jerry that Chinese government should be more open and transparent and to answer your question, I don’t think sweep problem under rugs is good for China.

Raj said:
With all the problems and shortcomings that China has, and the lack of transparency and openness, it has done no harm to any other countries for the past 40 years.

First, the Vietnamese would have something to say about that. Second, even if you are correct plenty of pain has been dealt out to Chinese in those last 40 years so I don’t see where you’re going with this.

William Huang:
For the first point on Vietnamese, yes there was a small armed conflict between the two but that’s limited to army combat for very short time on the board. There is no massive civilian death and prolonged war like Vietnam and Iraq war.

bt and HKer, I want to thank you both for your marvelous witty comments.

HKer, you are “right”. Always right. Yes, we are still at each others’ collective throats. I loved Margaret Cho’s clip. She is so funny. Her comments on Guvna Arnie (Aaaaahniiiiie) are just too much! Her impression of Bjork is wild! 😀 ::LMAO::

I miss SK, too. Yeah, I think he would love the “don’t f*** with vegans”. I am a vegetarian and I can’t stand most vegans. They are wacko.

bt, you are so right on, categorizations suck. As you say, As you say, redneck, ignorant stereotypes are hardly relegated to just one country, culture or race. I have run into them everywhere, including here in Taipei. Kind of like an inverse regression of Watson’s “100th Monkey Theory”. You can have advances in consciousness. You can have regressions.

Again, bt and HKer, thanks for lightening up this thread. Your humor is much appreciated.

—————-

#147

WKL, thanks for the touching story. Disappointment never feels good; it hurts. Life is hard.

We Jews have experienced so much disappointment over so many generations, so many centuries. So much so that disappointment is a friendly ghost in our life. I guess that gives us an advantage in dealing with it. We know it may just be around the corner. We will say “Hello, my old friend. How are you doing? You still hurt, but it was nice seeing you again. Well, I have to get going. Bye for now.” To me, that is my take on part of the Jewish experience.

That is probably why we have “chutzpah”. And when we are feeling down or disappointed, we say, “A bi gezunt!” Which means, “You are here. You are healthy. What are you complaining about?” I can still hear my grandfather saying that. It is one of our favorite idioms, or idiotismes, as some French are prone to say. I like “idiotisme”!

I wonder if we will ever bridge the gap between Chinese culture and Western culture. I wonder if there will ever be peace in Israel. I don’t know. I don’t have the answers. Just lots of questions. Oh well, I will keep moving on.

HKer, I am through with their throats for now. Just gets to a point where enough is enough. I don’t think I will ever figure myself out. I think I will take your marvelous advice and watch more Margaret Cho. And of course, George Carlin. 😀

To answer your previous question of a while ago, “No, I have not visited Milton Freakman’s grave, ever.” Maybe we should train one of those many 100,000s of “Golden Shield”-Shenzhen CCTVs on his gravesite just to make sure he still is dead. I am sure that they would not notice one measly CCTV missing. BTW, Naomi Klein, writing in Rolling Stone Magazine, reported that there will be 2,000,000 CCTVs in Shenzhen by 2011.

@facts (#156): “What’s so funny about the responses to my posts is that those Westerner all resorted to the same, what I call, a straw-man tactic. Making up a straw-man, and say that’s my opponent, then beat up on the straw-man and declear victory.”

Did you read what Ted asked you in #137 about the reports of the earthquake, and what is your answer to that? I don’t see him put up any strawmen in that post, and I think he’s a Westerner. And what are your answers to these questions that I asked you: “If there is a bias or a skew, is it primarily against China? Is it a government order behind all of it? How is the rest of the Western world reported?”

“What I did was to offer a candid observation of Western media reporting on China, and asked a few questions as to why such gross misrepresentation has persisted over time and no improvements (easily implementable) has ever made.”

I agree with you about media bias about China (and other authoritarian countries) in the Western press, which you will probably see if you read some of my other posts. My explanation to this is not propaganda but _internalization_, that is, having been taught about the wonders of democracy in school, people have an inbuilt bias they do not even perceive. That is my explanation, rather than willful bias. I’m saying this because I’ve met people in the West with quite extreme viewpoints about, for example, Tibet. They do not want to “split” China and make it miserable, they just go with what they believe. Before you say again that I confuse Western media and the public opinion, I say that this is part of my explanation: Western journalists think like ordinary people does, and that is why they write what they do.

A lot of Westerners have an almost holy concept of the word democracy, and will feel moral indignation if anyone questions it. I don’t agree with this way of thinking, but it is also an explanation for their bad feelings towards China. If they truly went to China or got to know more about it, they would be more balanced.

Also, since some Chinese believe there are no problems in China (except superficial criticism that does “not hurt or ache”, like the Chinese saying goes), they will naturally conclude that all negative reporting is a lie. This mindset seems very common to me. That there could be any reason for negative reporting never strikes them.

“I know some will argue with me Western media is not funded by gov. so by definition is technically not propaganda. Yet, such petty technicality does not change the result a bit, at the end of day, the public is brainwashed to believe a lie or a fantacy if you will.”

An organization can very well put out propaganda, and it seems to be consensus here among most posters that the Western media is ruled by large corporations. However, I just don’t see your “willful” part. And lying – how do you know that the US lied with respect to the WMD, for example, if everything the Western media says is lies? Did you read it in the Chinese press, and if so, how did they get their information?

As for “so-called freedom of the press”, such freedom is not hampered by having large propaganda outlets in the form of corporations like ABC or FOX (I’m giving American examples because most people here relate best to that) as long as you can still raise your voice. My example with the Pew report being reported, even if only in a few newspapers, show that you can at least write about it. Like a Taiwanese man I met said to some mainlanders, when asked what the Taiwanese media writes about the mainland: “We at least have several voices. Your media only speaks with one voice.”

An example I forgot to make was Kashmir. It shows pretty well what is at stake here – it seems that people there are treated like in Xinjiang and Tibet (according to the negative reports, not that Indians “liberated serfs” in the area), but without the international outcry. Why? Because India is a democracy, and people somehow believe a democratic country wouldn’t mistreat its citizens. I was surprised once to see a very positive report in Time Magazine (or Newsweek, don’t remember exactly) about how Kashmir now was quite orderly and few “separatists” were making any noise.

This is because of ideological entanglements, not because they want to put China down. India was a colony too once, much more strictly ruled and oppressed by the British than ever China was. If it were colonial interests behind the Western negative opinions about China, wouldn’t they be even happier to go about India?

And finally, well, the Pew report mentioned here and there, where did it originate? In the West, with its “so-called freedom of speech”, or in China?

When people like facts critique the western media they seem to do so on western media’s grounds ie calling them hypocritical as opposed to presenting a better alternative. Apparently the west are lie machines, tools of the government, that the westerners are brainwashed etc.

Ironically that implies that they are trying to head in the right direction they just aren’t there yet – very much the same thing their defenders might say. In fact it sounds like the memes invented by the fringe western media about the mainstream western media (opinions that are ironically to a large extent just self perception).

Maybe what is hidden here are real critiques such as “the western media undermine effective government with their questions” or “the western media is inefficient at moving information and should be structured differently” or “some things the public should not know” etc but to talk like that might be honest enough to reveal that both sides don’t actually share some core values (which is more common than most of us care to admit) and that all those appeals to hypocrisy were laced with hypocrisy.

GM was actually ahead of Toyota, and now working our way back towards a plug an electric car via modified hybrid, but they had the technology 12,14 years ago, you can’t make this stuff up. The patent for the battery that made possible the EV1 was bought by Exxonmobil just so it would never be utilized again. I think that is why in restructuring the auto industry, you have to get rid of the executives.

Its not just enough throw money at them. It gives you a sense of how profound the challenge is—just analogizing Bob Rubin for a second, in a country where market capitalism has as much power as it does in the U.S., whether the villain of the piece is GM or Robert Rubin and Citigroup, it is bigger than any one person, its a system you have to fight. It’s the mark of their power—residual power of the system. Even when the system as come to a crisis of its own making, and your president as attractive and intelligent as Barack Obama, the institutional practice to reappoint the same standards are overwhelming. It is only when Obama looks over the cliff of the failure of his own administration because he has not thought boldly enough, that he may change his plans and move in a more radical direction.

So far the direction whether its taxing rich people, he has moved and is disappointing. The same thing was true of the Roosevelt administration in the beginning. All you can do is hope the pressure from folks like us, ordinary people and social movements, and from the dire circumstances we face ,will push the ministration in a more progressive direction.

I’d love to have more people involved in this process and I rely more on readers to make recommendations, especially since I don’t have much time to read through all the comments recently. I am glad to see we have a mini discussion on whether a comment should be highlighted or de-highlighted. I hope this will lead to better implementation of this feature.

@GNZ: One thing that bothers me with media in general is that there is no power-sharing mechanism, or if there are institutions they are weak. If somebody gets slandered or misreported, they have to work hard to regain their reputation, whereas the media can just go on with business as usual.

The question is how to institutionalize such a force against the media, and how to give it real power.

However, at that level, I do agree that we all are personally responsible for the action and the consequence of our government.

I don’t. Perhaps if you support and help foster their actions, but apart from that it’s not reasonable to say people are responsible.

As for your ranting on Culture Revolution, I suppose some Chinese pissed you off. I am sorry I wasn’t there

Lol, some Chinese people have pissed me off so I raise an issue where almost all the victims were Chinese?! Dude, what planet are you on? Besides if you don’t want to talk about the CR because you weren’t born yet then don’t bring up matters further back in American history.

Western media did report civilian casualties, but usually the civilians not killed by American armed forces. Examples, they do report how many people killed by a suicide bomber. I meant specifically how many children were killed by US bombing, ground attack, raid, etc.

Many UK newspapers always report how many die at the hands of US attacks.

However, I do have problem with western media for what they did on March riot in Tibet. They use Nepal’s police arrest picture to show a “police brutality”.

Yeah, like a handful out of how many agencies? Why do you stereotype? It’s like saying “Chinese are violent” because of a few riots in China.

I have not seen an article addressing the well being of Iraqi people for their sake, not some propaganda that they can vote now and school is open, etc.

Then you don’t read widely enough. The Guardian and Independent alone had plenty of stuff.

For the first point on Vietnamese, yes there was a small armed conflict between the two but that’s limited to army combat for very short time on the board. There is no massive civilian death and prolonged war like Vietnam and Iraq war.

It may have been relatively short lived, but it was a major war involving several hundred thousands soldiers. The Vietnamese also claimed there were many civilian casualties, though this can’t be verified.

For the second point, yes, in your dream.

Err, Cultural Revolution, 1989 massacres, forced abortions under one child policy, continuing suppression of various peoples/groups in China for many different reasons, how peasants are treated by the authorities to free-up their land for property development, cover-ups concerning health/environmental matters that lead to people becoming ill/dying.

Do I need to go on?

+++

@Nobody

I’m not sure whether I was supposed to find your comment funny or offensive, so I’ll move back to my question. You associated yourself with some rather ignorant comments and I would like to offer you the chance to dissociate yourself from them if not everything the author says.

“I’m not sure whether I was supposed to find your comment funny or offensive,”

Oh, Raj, don’t be offended, Magaret Cho is hilarious isn’t she?

“You associated yourself with some rather ignorant comments ”

I suppose you are right. I am ignorant, and I don’t mind being associated with ignorant others. Afterall I am just another “nobody.”

You, Raj, on the other hand, are a seasoned writer /Blog commentor – Like I said, I was a regular reader of PKD for almost a year, until I discovered FM – thru PKD. Richard usually have good articles. It is so sad that its Comment section is been inundated with endless hateful bickerings. I did have fun exchanging amicable comments with Richard on his “Craptacular,” article, though. LOL.

GM! What a joke. Long before the current crisis, they were a joke. Now we are supposed to feel sorry for them. Poor leadership is the real story. You are right, HKer, fire all the top executives. Funny, the execs point fingers at the unions. Guess what, Ford, GM and Chrysler, your two most important groups are your customers and your employees. Too bad that the execs aren’t aware of that.

Can the American auto industry be restructured to a profitable, modern industry which is more environmentally responsible. I don’t know. If I had to guess, I would say not.

When my daughter graduated from medical school this year, my graduation gift was a new car. She is now a resident at a hospital in Oakland County, just outside of Detroit, MI, home of the American auto industry. I told her no American cars. I don’t trust them and I am too far away from her. I wanted reliable. She wanted a Nissan Rogue. I said there was not enough reliability data. She did not want a Toyota RAV-4. So I bought her a new Honda CRV. Cost me more money, but it is reliable.

Bob “Citi” Rubin belongs in jail, too. His fingerprints are all over the Wall Street and banking bailout. His fingerprints are all over the current Wall Street financial crisis.

He was with Goldman Sachs for years. He joined the management committee in 1980. He was co-chairman for a few years. Then he went on to several positions in the Clinton White House in the 90’s, including a stint as Treasury Secretary. He and Alan Greenspan were the central players in the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act. Thus Rubin is centrally responsible for the ultimate deregulation action in the US. Guess who benefitted the most from the repeal? You got it, Citigroup. And guess who got a sweetheart job as the top management advisor at Citi and sits on the board of directors? He makes $1,000,000 a year. He has an annual bonus of $8,400,000, according to Forbes. His total compensation for 2007 was $17 million. He has made $115 million at Citi since 1999. Can you say, “Criminal?”.

Regarding Obama or Nobama, whatever your choice. I have little faith in him. He has joined the league of the ruling elite. He has been bought and paid for by Wall Street. Here is a report, dated September 18, from The Center for Responsive Politics. It concerns the Wall Street contributions to or investment in the Nobama campaign. Obviously, more moolah was invested after this report was published.

Bundlers for McCain, Obama Are Among Wall Street’s Tumblers
Published by Massie Ritsch on September 18, 2008 11:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)
How did Wall Street’s largest firms also become some of the largest donors to John McCain and Barack Obama’s presidential campaigns? Take a look at the candidates’ rosters of bundlers on OpenSecrets.org, and it becomes clear.

McCain’s list includes at least 69 individuals who, according to his campaign, have raised a total of at least $11.4 million for his campaign. That makes the struggling investment industry his top source of bundlers. (Bundlers are those wealthy individuals who hit up their coworkers, family and friends to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars, in addition to any contributions from their own pockets.) In the second spot is the real estate industry, where at least 55 individuals have delivered a total of $9.5 million or more to McCain. Overall, bundlers in the finance, insurance and real estate sector have hauled in at least $30 million for the Republican candidate — far more than any other sector.

Obama’s list gives the appearance that he has not leaned so heavily on bundlers working on Wall Street, although since his campaign has ignored repeated requests from the Center for Responsive Politics and other watchdog groups to disclose his bundlers’ employers and occupations, these figures are probably undercounts. The securities and investment industry is Obama’s second-largest source of bundlers, after lawyers, and at least 56 individuals have raised at least $8.9 million for his campaign. Bundlers in the larger finance, insurance and real estate sector have collected at least $13.4 million for Obama, making it his most generous sector.

Bundlers for the McCain campaign include Merrill Lynch CEO John Thain, who is listed as raising at least half a million dollars. That may help explain why Merrill Lynch’s employees have made the firm McCain’s biggest donor — when the boss is giving, others follow suit. McCain’s bundles have also come in from executives at Lehman Brothers, the firm formerly known as Bear Stearns, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase, Credit Suisse and Wachovia. Former senator Phil Gramm, an executive at UBS, and Geoffrey Boisi, a board member for rescued mortgage buyer Freddie Mac, have both reportedly raised between $100,000 and $250,000 for McCain.

Obama’s list of bundlers includes several executives at Citigroup, who together have raised between $600,000 and $1.5 million. Executives at Lehman Brothers, Credit Suisse and Goldman Sachs (Obama’s number-one donor) are also in the mix.

Overall, the securities and investment industry has contributed about $10 million to Obama and $7 million to McCain. To all federal candidates for president and Congress, and to political parties, the industry has contributed more than $101 million in the 2008 election cycle, 56 percent of it to Democrats. The Democrats’ edge is a relatively recent development, however; Republicans had the advantage for most of the last 10 years.

Such bundlers get perks from the Obama campaign and are made to feel part of its inner workings through weekly conference calls and quarterly meetings, advance copies of his speeches, access to his top advisers, opportunities to influence the campaign’s message, and so on.

One bundler who deserves special mention is Chicago billionaire Penny Pritzker, who happens to be Obama’s national Finance Chair. Pritzker was an owner and board member of Superior Bank of Chicago, which went bust in 2001 with over $1 billion in deposits. Timothy Anderson — who obsessively pursued the late Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL) over his role in the failure of Clyde Federal Savings & Loan — has been quoted as saying that “Superior’s owners were to sub-prime lending what Michael Milken was to junk bonds.”’

Nobama is in bed with the financial industry.

HKer, you might also enjoy this report on OB’s transition team. It is also from The Center for Responsive Politics.

Obama’s Transition Team Includes Contributors, Bundlers and Lobbyists
Published by Lindsay Renick Mayer on November 25, 2008 12:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Members of Barack Obama’s transition team weren’t necessarily selected solely on their résumés and expertise–some may have scored positions over similarly qualified individuals because they supported the president-elect by bundling money for his presidential campaign or opening their own wallets to him. And although Obama prohibits registered lobbyists from making financial contributions to his transition, influence peddlers past and present are showing up on the team that’s building the foundation for the next administration.

The Obama transition office recently announced nearly 400 individuals who have been dispatched to review the workings of federal agencies. Our researchers here at the Center for Responsive Politics are working to match these individuals to our databases of contributors, bundlers and lobbyists.

Check out the full list of names, along with tallies of their campaign contributions and links to their profiles in our Lobbying, Revolving Door and Bundler databases here. Here’s a summary of what we’ve found:

$824,155: Minimum total that transition team members contributed to Obama’s campaign and to joint fundraising committees formed to support his election. Like figures below, this amount may well be higher. Lacking more than just a name for many team members, CRP has not been able to match everyone to our databases.

$3,869.27: Average contribution to Obama and joint fundraising committees from those on the transition team who contributed to the president-elect this election cycle. Supporters were limited to giving $4,600 directly to Obama since the start of 2007 but could give additional money to the Democratic party.

56: Percent of all announced transition team members who contributed to Obama or a joint fundraising committee supporting his candidacy.

$2 million: Total amount that donating transition team members gave to Democratic candidates and committees this cycle.

$7,977.04: Average contribution that donating transition team members gave to all federal candidates, parties and committees this election cycle. Any individual could give up to $108,200 this election cycle. The percentage of Americans who give even $200 to federal politics is less than one-half of 1 percent.

6: Number of team members who, apparently, didn’t give money to any Democratic party committee or candidate, including Obama, but contributed to Republicans or other parties.

23: Number of transition team leaders who are, or have been since 1998, federally registered lobbyists. Seven of them were registered lobbyists as of the start of this year. Obama has prohibited currently registered lobbyists from working on his transition team in fields of policy on which they’ve tried to influence Congress in the last year. They’re also required to stop all lobbying activity during their transition work.

14: Number of transition team members who raised at least $50,000 for Obama’s campaign. Every one of these bundlers also gave at least $2,300 to Obama out of his or her own pocket.

$2.8 million: Minimum total amount bundled by members of the transition team.

Guys, as far as actual informed commentary goes, this thread has already gone bye-byes, it’s already degenerated into the usual “western media lies!”, “cultural revolution!”, “Fox News!” – I thought we were talking about China and the EU?

Meanwhile, back in the real world, the French are suggesting that the cancellation has nothing to do with meeting the Dalai Lama – something that would make sense, since all the major EU member-state leaders have met his holiness – yet no-one is suggesting that other meetings should be boycotted. Likewise – if you wish to target the French, why boycott an EU meeting? Despite what our American friends might think, France is not Europe.

My suggestion (and the suggestion of many other observers) is that this probably has more to do with the long running spat – with the EU as a whole over imports – something which observers have been suggesting was likely to become a sticking point for the last year or so.

Perhaps, but I didn’t see the relevance of your quote to my comment. Also I think you’ll find she isn’t that well-known in the UK (at least outside the British-Chinese community). 😉

I suppose you are right. I am ignorant, and I don’t mind being associated with ignorant others. Afterall I am just another “nobody.”

You, Raj, on the other hand, are a seasoned writer /Blog commentor

Pfff, you do yourself too little credit and give too much to me. I think that it’s clear that Sarkozy isn’t doing this deliberately to rile China – if he wanted to piss Beijing off he’d flog Rafales and Scorpene submarines to the Taiwanese. He could make 10 billion euros easily out of that, whilst saving money for the French budget by making the unit price of the Rafale way cheaper. Or he could push for the European Union to set up some sort of trade deal with Taiwan (hey, it’s always a great way to annoy China and it’s good for the region). Seeing the Dalai Lama does little or nothing for him. If you want to annoy China (as in that’s the desired result) might as well get something decent out of it too.

As for me, I learn something new every day (and I can’t really be bothered to blog these days either).

Useless points, all of you!!!
Let us have a strategy for the Eu=France: Instead of Eight-Nation armies some hundred years ago, we will use 26(?)- Nation armies. First send several groups of Mirage to bombard Beijing and Shanghai. After complete eliminate the Chinese economies and also their few airplanes (Migs or something dump), send EU navy fleets to their coast cities. Don’t forget the brave Polish navy and special force! Maybe the little Estonia SWAT team to Forbidden city and complete arrest the leadership! Then we will complete conquer the Chinese people! Glories of EU!!! Then we will ask Carrefour to open Opium-House on every corner of each city. Problem solved!!!

The Opium will be from Afghanistan. It will solve the problem in that country and help our big brother– The USA! Since the people in Afghanistan are rich then, they may really help us to kick Taliban’s Ass. The world terrorism will be solved!!!
What a brilliant idea!!! Anybody will second my suggestion? Anybody known French president’s phone number or email? Please pass this to them, I give up my copy right for this idea!

With a barrel of oil below $45, switching to hybrid or electric car for most is not cost effective until it reaches back to $100 – the effort should be continued as the oil price now is a guessing game). The proposed use of the bailout money will not save the big 3, but may buy some time. The problem can be resolved by taking out the stupid union (let supply/demand do the job), cutting down salary/benefit, keeping higher tariff for foreign cars/ US cars assembled in Mexico (it is still free trade if both sides observe the same tariff rate), cutting duplicate brands…

Some US cars are about the same quality as the Japanese. Just biased and prejudiced that is caused by poor quality 10 years or so ago. Many US auto workers own foreign cars – they should be lay off first. Personally my family has two US cars (Malibu and Pontiac Vibe that has a Corolla engine) and they’re working great.

The following is an e-mail distributed to me, so I’m not responsible for its content. The message is buy American if the price/quality is close, that will help your fellow citizens and eventually yourself.

——-

This one needs to be forwarded to as many people as possible as a reminder of who is actually taking care of business at home. I could let this one pass by, considering the recent news and events regarding the Big 3, and what’s at stake for current, and future jobs for millions of people, and the risk of losing technological advances, knowledge, and experience of our manufacturing capabilities. LET EVERYONE KNOW

For the record…
Ford, Chrysler and GM’s contributions after 9/11 An interesting commentary… You might find this of interest:
‘CNN Headline News did a short news listing regarding Ford and GM’s contributions to the relief and recovery efforts in New York and Washington . The findings are as follows…..
1. Ford- $10 million to American Red Cross matching employee contributions of the same number plus 10
Excursions to NY Fire Dept. The company also offered ER response team services and office space to displaced
government employees.
2. GM- $10 million to American Red Cross matching employee contributions of the same number and a fleet of vans, SUV’s, and trucks.
3. Daimler Chrysler- $10 million to support of the children and victims of the Sept. 11 attack.
4. Harley Davidson motorcycles- $1 million and 30 new motorcycles to the New York Police Dept.
5. Volkswagen-Employees and management created a Sept 11 Foundation, funded initial with $2 million, for the assistance of the children and victims of the WTC.
6. Hyundai- $300,000 to the American Red Cross.
7. Audi-Nothing.
8. BMW-Nothing.
9. Daewoo- Nothing.
10. Fiat-Nothing.
11. Honda- Nothing despite boasting of second best sales month ever in August 2001
12. Isuzu- Nothing.
13. Mitsubishi-Nothing..
14. Nissan-Nothing.
15. Porsche-Nothing. Press release with condolences via the Porsche website.
16. Subaru- Nothing.
17. Suzuki- Nothing.
18. Toyota-Nothing despite claims of high sales in July and August 2001. Condolences posted on the website
Whenever the time may be for you to purchase or lease a new vehicle, keep this information in mind. You might want to give more consideration to a car manufactured by an American-owned and / or American based company. Apart from Hyundai and Volkswagen, the foreign car companies contributed nothing at all to the citizens of the United States …
It’s OK for these companies to take money out of this country, but it is apparently not acceptable to return some in a time of crisis. I believe we should not forget things like this. Say thank you in a way that gets their attention..
BUY YOUR NEXT VEHICLE FROM GM, FORD OR CHRYSLER.

@TonyP4 – Why are you shilling for GM, Ford and Chrysler, especially given how absolutely unverifiable those figures are? And how exactly are Honda etc. ‘taking money out of the country’ when they are building plants and source the vast majority of their supplies in America?

If only we start selling opium to China and make them addicted to it again, we will have a world peace!!! We will no longer to run trading deficit with the stupid Chinese. They will be again to addicted to the drugs and only work harder for that. We will have plenty cheap and good goods from them there will be a happy world!!!

Hm, I didn’t know that Cho is not popular in the UK. I thought since she’s with Cyndi Lauper and have sold out shows in the UK, that she was ….And I also thought she’s a star from the fact that every American from age 33 – 55 I’d talked to loves Margaret Cho. As to whether she’s funny or not, well, that’s as Jerry says what Duke Ellington says. But she is a riot., totally un-PC.

[ The patent for the battery that made possible the EV1 was bought by Exxonmobil just so it would never be utilized again. ]

# 185,
“With a barrel of oil below $45, switching to hybrid or electric car for most is not cost effective until it reaches back to $100 -”

I’m hearing, We’re on the Highway to Hell (AC/DC), in my mind right now…

Um, how about the very very pressing global environmental issues…yunno, remember Mother earth, the air we breathe, the river of poison and the oil leaks, wierd forms of cancer, escalating numbers of respiratory diseases etc?

Margaret Cho once made a joke about Chinese food, something like its not comparable to Korean food….I was like ru fucking kidding me? of all the foods in the world, Korean food? Korean food is an insult to the word “food”.

That just showd u people can be so different and some difference is simply irreconcilable.

HKer, I for one am appreciative of the links to M. Cho. She is a scream.

—————-

#185

With a barrel of oil below $45, switching to hybrid or electric car for most is not cost effective until it reaches back to $100 – the effort should be continued as the oil price now is a guessing game).

Tony, I agree that, from a short-term financial view, electric and hybrid cars are not cost effective. Also, I also am not so crazy about driving around in a vehicle loaded with lead-acid batteries. I hope the Li-Ion batteries in newer hybrids are safer than those in laptop computers.

That said, I am with HKer. From a long term financial and environmental view, electric cars and hybrids look a whole lot better than the conventional IC cars. I, for one, don’t want to be gasping for my last breath of clean air, wheezing and coughing out my last sentence, “But look how much money I saved.”

“The proposed use of the bailout money will not save the big 3, but may buy some time.” I agree. But I don’t think that the union deserves the main share of the blame. I believe that it is the leadership of the Big 3 that has been the major stumbling block. The unions came about because the owners treated the workers poorly in the past. I think that changes need to be made in the UAW leadership, but do not believe in obliterating the unions.

Ford has the best leadership, IMHO. Actually, Ford has treated their employees better than the other 2, all the way back to Henry Ford’s days.

@ Raj #178
I am not really sure what you are mumbling about. You seemed angry but I can’t see you point. For example, you quoted someone else’s response about Culture Revolution in a discussion which I was not involved at all. When I tired to tell you that I wasn’t there when you had discussion with them, then you accuse me of avoiding the issue of Culture Revolution.

You points are often incoherent and lack logic connection. For example, you insist on that I should accept the fact that Chinese has committed sins. Then, when I say that I agree with Jerry that both our governments committed sins and we as individual are all responsible for it, you disagree. What you want me to do?

One thing is very clear to me is that you don’t like China. That doesn’t bother me at all. If you want to make a point, please make the point, don’t mumble. If you only want to express your anger, I suggest you go to different blogs where a lot of people would love to hear you. For example, you will really enjoy some of Tibetan independent blogs over there. You should see the degree of anger , it’s way up to the roof. But this is only a suggestion.

Every country has its own dirty laundries and no one is on a high moral ground to lecture anyone. Yes, China is disliked by the western powers not because China is worse than they are. It is only because China stands up to them. That’s the sole and only reason. If you have any sense of history, the world has always been ruled by power. You know what? China is not interested in joining western power.

I have no dilutions about what my government or any government for that matter and I have no problem at all to talk about. I have no intention to paint China like a democracy and I have no interest to ask my government or my people to measure up to western standard. At the same time, I don’t think China is better than anyone else either.

What I will not accept is outside people give us lecture on morality and I am not interested to hear from people’ anger just because they don’t like China. I have no problem to discuss with them, but the discussion has to be based on fact, logic, and fairness not bunch of gibberish just to vent the frustration.

To make the life easier, let me give you a blank check, so to speak, that for every factual evidence that you can provide for whatever bad deed China has done from 3,000 B.C. to present day, I accept full heartedly in advance. I hope this will provide a closure in our discussion.

Maybe your real motive is telling people about China’s sins (aside from being angry). In that case, my suggestion is just forget about it. Western media is way ahead of you and they have done a much better job than you. Just look at this way, so far in all your arguments, you haven’t made up a lie about China (I do appreciate that), but western media has done plenty.

# 179 Nobody says: “Raj, on the other hand, are a seasoned writer /Blog commentor – Like I said, I was a regular reader of PKD. Richard usually have good articles. It is so sad that its Comment section is been inundated with endless hateful bickerings. “

@#180, good to know Jerry doesn’t drink Obama koolaid. I suspect a large chunk of enthusiastic supporters of President Elect will be hugely disappointed some time down the road, however, few would admit openly so.

I thought that Raj addressed your comments point for point in #178 and I didn’t find what he said illogical or incoherent. Maybe his comments were a bit acerbic but I saw that on your end also.

@ facts:

“What’s so funny about the responses to my posts is that those Westerner all resorted to the same, what I call, a straw-man tactic. Making up a straw-man, and say that’s my opponent, then beat up on the straw-man and declear victory… Indeed, no one really questioned my observation of western media practice, other than arguing about the validity of Pew Research results.”

I’m a westerner and I questioned your observations in my post #137. I think plenty of other perfectly reasonable thoughts have been offered the best from Wukailong and Jerry. I would still like to know your opinion, William yours as well.

I agree with the air pollution. Even the hybrid has too many problems to be practical. You have to calculate the saving with a hybrid (annual miles and cost of oil) and see whether it justifies the annualized extra cost and the maintenance on extra drive train. Lithium has a long way to go with the safety (Sony will tell you how they explode) and the cost. Hydrogen has too many problems to be practical and safe for a long while.

A lot of times idealism and practicality do not agree. Wind, hydro, nuclear and solar are great in theory. However, if oil stays less than $50, they’re not practical in most cases. They may pollute less though.

China can do a lot in limiting air population. Train is the greenest. Chinese cars made in China do not have the same pollution device than the US. Factory is the best area on air and water pollution. Supply/demand plays the role. With $120 per barrel, folks drive less and buy smaller cars.

I stated that I will not respond to the part on donation as it is not mine but I stated we should help our fellow citizens like Chinese buying Chinese goods.

Exxonmobile’s deal is correct as a business and it is legal. However, they screw up in image big time. The government should step in.

@all to whom it may concern
The defense of “free” press has taken a little comical turn, as I ignored Ted’s raising of the Earth Quake reporting as a defense for the Western press. I didn’t have time to cover everything at the moment of writing my last post. Also, it can’t be considered a legitimate defense. An accused drug dealer can not use a short period of inactivity in drug business as a defense for rest of his drug dealing career. An accused serial killer cannot use intervals of dormancy on his killing rampage as a defense for those lives he sniffed out. Simple as that. Proposing such a defense in and of itself, revealed something about the presenter. As if drug dealing and life taking are the norm of human existance to such individuals, and refraining from doing so has become a gift to the rest of human race. Indeed in arguing this way, I have given grounds to Western media of their habitual spinning and misrepresentation of the facts even during the Earth Quake period.

For instance, in the overall effort of rescue and disaster relief, Chinese military played a pivotal role. Especially in the days immdiately following the Quake, due to the harsh terrain and the after shocks, the disaster area was virtually inaccessssable. Only given the steely resovles and at the risk of their own lives, the men in Chinese military made such rescue and relief effort possible. Many lives were saved, even at the cost of their own. How much of heroic efforts of Chinese military were reported in the West? Not that I am aware. If it did happen at all, it must be concealed well. What I saw in Wester publications, Chinese soldiers were all termed rescue workers, no report of the difficulty they had to encounter and the sacrifice they had to endure. None I saw, please provide info if the defenders of Western media have any.

It’s understandable, Chinese military is amongst the evilest of all evils of evil China. It has denied the West its most direct and final resort to deal with China as it pleased before 1949. To the West, Chinese military has not even a shred of legitimacy, any effort of China developing of military strength is viewed as a threat. Of cause, China as evil as it is, it has no right to its existance, not to mention a military force. In fact, even the Taiwan press much to their displeasure, begrudgedly acknowleged the effort of PLA and the praises PLA received from the people. Because all Chinese around the world saw who was there putting their own lives on the line to fight for the lives of the victims, Taiwan media would lose credibility to the global Chinese community, had they not done it. In Western media, it was all about NGO’s, the corrupt officials, the foreign rescue teams, the desperation and complaining of the victims (rescue efforts not adequate), while I don’t deny some basis of truth in those reportings but exaggeration and spinning abound. Finally, some credit was given to the Chinese leadership for effective planning. Given the fiasco of Katrina, this contrast is laid bare for all to see. Such is considered the grand achievement of Western media reporting on China by a few in this forum, to be used for defending the gross misrepresentation of China past and present, of cause minus Quake period (May 08 to July 08?), again I am speachless.

Regarding the concern of me using Western standards and poll results to reveal the hypocracy of Western media. Because it is the only way the Westerners are willing to consider such criticism, any frame work and data outside the reign the West is immediately considered commie or otherwise unworthy of discussion(speaking of closemindedness). It by no means indicates my acceptance of the Western framework. Why this is so difficult for some to see is beyond me.

Someone seems to be interested in raising the difference of Western treatment of India and China; it is indeed a worthy issue to be poundered on. I shall do so in due time.

It seems to me the fact that all the auto makers are failing together that the cause is not primarily things like “bad leadership” as easy as it might be to blame single people. Sure the leadership may have made mistakes but the core issue is “there is an auto industry in the USA” it is like having a giant rice paddy field in the middle of Singapore.

There are things like the auto workers union the power of dealerships in the USA vs the car manufacturers, the cost of upgrading facilities and all that sort of thing but in the end it adds up to the original point. I suggest any bailout should be a managed closure.

@Wukailong
Yes, the question is how we can put those sorts of things in place without causing more harm than good.
Compared to the other situation we get where people are 99 (or 100 percent) sure something is true and relevant but to scared to say it. Still if anyone puts forward a solution i am interested.

Maybe I wasn’t clear about my point so let me elaborate little more detail with one example and with a consequence of discussion as I listed below (between dashed lines). I simplify some for the purpose of easy reading.

———————————————————————————————————————————————-
Jerry (#135): We (Americans) grew up with these freedoms.
William (#139): No, not all Americans. Just 40 years ago, African-American……

Raj (#143): American has moved on, what about Culture Revolution?
William (#166) What about Culture Revolution?

Raj (#143): When people criticise the Cultural Revolution, the automatic fenqing response is….
William (#166): Sorry I wasn’t there.

Raj (#178): if you don’t want to talk about the CR because you weren’t born yet then don’t bring up matters further back in American history.
William (#197): You points are often incoherent and lack logic connection. For example….
———————————————————————————————————————————————-

I have two problems here:

1) There is no logic connection whatsoever between the Culture Revolution and point of contention between Jerry and me (whether all Americans grew up with freedom).

2) Raj’s support evidence (some people were sensitive about mentioning of Culture Revolution) and his statement, “They’ll even bring this up in the context of the 1989 massacre.” is another logic departure even further way from the Culture Revolution itself.

If there is any point one can deduct, it will be translated into something this sort: “you are no good either so don’t criticize others and you all are the same”. I don’t want to put my words into his mouth but that’s my impression.

This is by no means that Raj could not bring up the issue of Culture Revolution nor I was trying to avoid it. It will be a complete discussion altogether. But again, discussion has to have logic and fact connected together. Even a broken clock can be right twice a day, what’s the big deal?

What Raj did was that he turned a discussion into a kind of shouting-match, a “pissing contest” if you will, and I am just not interested. I am trying to state my reasons why I have hard time to continue the discussion with him and I want to prevent the appearance of “avoiding the issue”.

If you still disagree, all I can say is: I am really sorry.

As for your comment in #137, I am afraid that too many comments are the continuation of the discussion between you and “FACTS” which I wasn’t involved at all. It will be too easy for me to jump into conclusion and take the words out of context.

We discuss everything in context. Without a common understanding of the context, the communication breaks down. This is the problem of the Tibet issue. There is fundamentally disagreement between China and the West regarding the history of Tibet and the history of the Dalai Lama.

What I can contribute is a Chinese perspective. In the eyes of Chinese, Tibet is a Chinese affair, it is about Chinese national unity, territory integrity and national security. There is no room for negotiation, no room for foreign interference. It is very insulting to Chinese that the head of a foreign country meets Dalai Lama. It is a symbol of foreign interference and hostility. The award of Nobel prize to a CIA agent, the award of EU Parliament to a convicted criminal, the attack of Olympic torch in Paris, the rude media lies about the Tibet riot, …, all tells that the West is treating China as an enemy; the West does not respect China and Chinese people at all.

The hostile actions of the west have consequences. I think, this time, the Chinese government took the right action. If you insist on insulting me, slander me, threaten my core interests, treat me like an enemy, so be it. It is only fair for China to respond and make you to pay. The west has been spoiled. The West is too arrogant and need to grow up, need to learn how to respect other people. The western lecture of democracy and human rights is a true laughing stock of the world. The west bombing and killings of Iraqis and Afghanis put Saddam and Hitler to shame.

I, for one, don’t want to be gasping for my last breath of clean air, wheezing and coughing out my last sentence, “But look how much money I saved.”

# 181
My suggestion (and the suggestion of many other observers) is that this probably has more to do with the long running spat – with the EU as a whole over imports – something which observers have been suggesting was likely to become a sticking point for the last year or so.

@facts: I do accept your claims about media bias, just not your ideas about conspiracy. I’m just curious how you think it works – are there specific meetings where people (leaders of Western media) sit and discuss how to undermine China, and have charts on how successful they’ve been?

I, like you, also don’t believe in a conspiracy at media control in the West but believe there is stong systemic media bias in the West. I don’t know how that specifically arises. No doubt history has something to do with it (i.e. yellow peril), but the following modern underpinnings are probably also relevant:

Western media propaganda arises despite central control as a natural product of a culture that is snobby, self-centered, and endowed with a strong sense of self-superiority (not entirely unfounded, to be honest, given the West’s current geopolitical advantage).

This media bias is exacerbated further as a result of Western media being profit driven institutions that are forced to tailor to a populace with generally low attention span. Stories become reduced to soundbites, with critical thinking/analysis generally avoided.

Add to that a society that identifies with its ideologies in as narcissist a manner as the West (regarding its notions of democracy, liberty, human rights, etc.), people can become darn right lazy about the realities of the world … with many even developing knee-jerk hostile reactions to societies that on the surface do not live up to such ideologies.

@Allen: I’m happy to see that we can agree on media bias without necessarily agreeing on why it exists (and that includes William Huang and even facts). Well, in this case (as to why it exists) we basically agree too. If there is a problem, the best thing is probably to find out why it exists rather than believing in things that make us good, and I’m happy to see most of us have taken this approach here.

@facts: If any criticism against your point is just an exception or “illegitimate”, then there isn’t much use in having this discussion. You’re right, period. Still, if Western media shouldn’t interfere with the Chinese media, then why should it itself have to report things the Chinese way, with pictures of the heroic army? (Mind you, much European media didn’t show heroic images of firefighters in 911, like the American media did. Some things, like Bush’s quote that “terrorists can shake the foundations of our buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America”, was considered silly by most media outlets) Of course, none of my points have any impact, since they are by your definition illegitimate, so feel free to forget this.

Then you can generalize and say “those Westerner all resorted to the same” even though it wasn’t true.

Actually, I’ve seen the same kind of reasoning at work in many Westerners I’ve met outside China – any counterexample about China is just met with ridicule because people know that the regime is evil, and you don’t need to change your mind on something you know, right?

@ FOARP #181:
I agree with you that we are carrying little too far off the main subject.

@ Brad #205
For Dalai Lama, the western power and west media use the religious leader and political leader interchangeably at their own convenience for whatever the justifications they need. There is really no consistency there. When they meet him, they say it’s only about religion but then they want Chinese government to negotiate with him.

Yes, Dalai Lama is a religious leader but he is first and foremost a political leader. He has a government work for him and good chunk of people obey his order in a secular term (in addition to religious) in every sense of the word. It wasn’t really his fault that he has to wear two hats but it’s pretty good excuse for the western government to accuse Chinese government over-reacting.

What’s reason for western leaders meeting Dalai Lama so frequently? Is this a new trend in spirituality? Are they really sitting there talking about religion and seeking spiritual guidance? These are all Christians and bible don’t teach compassion? If it’s all about religion as they said, then, the only explanation is divine intervention. I am inclined to believe George Bush because he talks to God directly but Sarkozy, I don’t think so.

The funny part is the Dalai Lama himself is getting serious. He really thought he had something to sell on spirituality as though millions of people never heard the word “compassion” in their life before him.

What China needs is a fu*k everybody attitude. When you do that, you will will actually get respect as long as you got a up hand. Look what happened to India. They have been trying to please everybody from US to Islamic terrorists. They got attacked but they have to ask US permission to know when and where they can retaliate. They thought west is on their side and will protect them. Now they got screwed by both sides. Not very smart.

The world power is taken never given. We, Chinese should have learned our lesson.

1) In finding the Whys, don’t you think it is good to also consider both conventional POVs, as well as alternative POVs, like CTs?

2)American intellects are very good with coming up with Conspiracy Theories….and most of the Chinese-Americans get that from reading American books and political materials. Many CTs are over time proven rather close to the truth, some are way off-the-wall, but for most – only time will tell.

3) Given the validity of the axiom that, “In politics, believe nothing until they are officially denied.” So, please don’t blindly listen to Bush who admonishes his fellow Americans “Don’t give in to false-flag/inside job CTs.” Hell, the whole Iraqi invasion was based on Conspiracy theory (WMD, war against terrorism., Iraq needs/welcomes US liberation etc)

4) We, hopefully, know that we don’t know, and are here to learn from each other.

WKL: “rather than believing in things that make us good, and I’m happy to see most of us have taken this approach here.”

Good advise, WKL. Don’t we all know how our own shit stink, and hate the fact that everyone else can smell it too.

2)American intellects are very good with coming up with Conspiracy Theories….
and most of the Chinese-Americans get that from reading American books and political materials.
– Many CTs are over time proven rather close to the truth,
– some are way off-the-wall,
– but for most – only time will tell.

WKL: “I don’t listen to Bush at all, but if he asked me not to believe a conspiracy theory, he would have a believer right away.”

@Nobody: Here is the answer I promised earlier about what to think about conspiracy theories, and also media bias in general. It requires some background on me.

Back in my teens, a new quite extreme Christian movement, similar to and actually supported by Oral Roberts’ church in the US, became popular in a nearby city (Uppsala, Sweden). Unlike the US, fundamentalist movements like this are not the norm and most people were shocked. Media caught on about it and I remember feeling a strong dislike towards a church that forced people into suicide, criticized handicapped people and looked down on the poor. At least that’s what I believed at the time.

Then a friend of my brother made a joke with him and gave him a free subscription to the movement’s newspaper. In the beginning my brother and I had a lot of fun with it, but after reading a couple of issues we began seeing differences between the way it was reported in mainstream media, and their own version. The things about handicapped people, forcing people into suicide etc just didn’t tally with their ideology. Later it dawned upon me that mainstream media had a certain idea of what fundamentalist Christianity was, and let that picture influence all their reporting. No serious description of the sect was given and almost anyone believed the TV and newspapers reports.

The response of the movement was to say that mainstream media has an atheist and un-Christian agenda.

In their own news reports, the group would also criticize the pro-Palestine viewpoints of Swedish newspapers. Again, this is different from the US which I percieve to be mostly pro-Israeli. While I don’t accept all their arguments, I have been reading through their analysis and it seems Israel’s actions are not fairly reported in Swedish and other European media. As an example, a picture with an Israeli police yelling at another Israeli (who looked beaten up) to take cover, was claimed to be an example of police brutality against a Palestinian man by mainstream media.

It is with this history in mind that I interpret the 3.14 riots and the Western media reporting (as well as the Chinese one). To me it seems that most people are new to media bias and surprised by it. Because they haven’t really analyzed it before, they believe it’s against their particular country. Therefore, things like dubiously cropped pictures or wrong captions create enormous passion.

The examples given above are only a few from my experience. I also know about a misreported crime case (I read the court protocols) and then there’s my parents’ unchanging belief in media bias against the political party they’ve always supported, something I grew up with but later stopped to believe.

I can say this is the reason I seldom see conspiracies behind media bias anymore. As for the bias itself, it is often very real and seem to be made up of ideas that a lot of people believe in, the prevailing ideology of a nation. In China it’s simpler because the government _is_ obviously managing media, but there is also an ideology or “soft power” that has been growing stronger the last decade that is leading its own life, so to speak.

Conspiracy theories are often about something that goes against the grain of mainstream thought, an idea that secret groups conspire to lead society a certain way. As long as we have unsolved mysteries like the Kennedy murder, we will probably also have conspiracy theories that can’t be proved or disproved. I actually do believe in one of them, that NATO bombed the Chinese embassy in Yugoslavia on purpose, as a threat to the Chinese. I don’t know exactly why they would do such a thing, but it makes more sense to me than the claim that they were using old maps.

The invasion of Iraq and the WMD claim, though, is on the border of a conspiracy theory. I would say it was an outright lie rather than a conspiracy, because the Americans presented their material in the UN to make a case. Everyone knew that Bush was eager to attack Iraq. He just needed to find a phoney reason. If the US had actually claimed to have found WMD it might had been a conspiracy because they could have planted the stuff there.

I agree that Americans tend to believe in conspiracy theories. Perhaps the individualism of the US makes such theories more appealing – things can’t just be poorly managed, there has to be someone behind it all.

I would like to add an interesting example, the conspiracy theory par excellence back in the 90s – the Roswell case with the dead aliens and their spacecraft. I spent quite some time back then reading about it, and even went to listen to a speech by Kent Jeffrey, a man who had by then researched the incident for 5 years. His conclusion back then was that about half of the material pointed to a sort of army weather balloon, and half of the material towards something, should I say, more exotic.

Five years later, I read some later articles and found out he had finally given up the case. He’s now of the opinion that it was a balloon and that the conspiracy doesn’t hold water. Still, this is the opinion of one (although well-researched) man, and it will probably continue as a symbol of popular culture for decades to come.

I think this also says it pretty well – testing how probable our theories are:

“The problem with the concept of a UFO crashing is that as technology advances, so does reliability. Be it with cars, airplanes, televisions, or wristwatches, the reliability of today’s technology far exceeds that of the technology of just a few decades ago. For example, because of the high reliability of their engines, long-range, twin-engine commercial jetliners are now authorized to fly nonstop across the North Atlantic. A few decades ago, that would have been unthinkable.

(…)

This incredible degree of reliability is found with a technology that would be primitive compared with a UFO.”

In the same way, what would be required of the media to cover up purposeful detonations in the WTC towers as the airliners crashed into them, or that there is a sort of secret plan to undermine one of the largest countries on earth? I think we have to ask such questions if we believe the theories are true.

Ted, I agree with you. Raj answered William clearly, coherently and logically. William tends to argue in non-sequiturs, jumbling up the points of those who disagree with him. At least I can’t follow his responses or thinking. It is too much like work.

It is very hard to have a good discussion with those who engage in historical revisionism and reinvention (or is that hysterical revisionism?), and who engage in changing paradigms when it serves their purposes. It is bad enough to use mixed metaphors, but mixed paradigms? Go figure! I don’t think that they can. When all else fails, they engage in vituperative, demagogic diatribes and distortion. They will use whatever constructs which are convenient to make their point. Methinks that they have some pathological need “to be right”. It is just so patently obvious to me. I am thinking that this kind of behavior may be the reason we have not seen SK for a while. Or Steve. It tends to discourage me, too. I just hope that FM does not turn into a “Tower of Babel” (or is that Babble?).

Here are some memories I have of the Sichuan earthquake. I was in the US for my daughter’s graduation from medical school. I remember the evil Western media showing what pictures they had of the disaster. CNN and BBC showed Chinese soldiers having to work their way into the most heavily damaged areas. The reporters made it painfully clear that the soldiers were operating under dangerous conditions: aftershocks, potential dam collapses, unsafe buildings, sliding hillsides. I also remember parents wandering around looking for their missing children. Most of the parents carried pictures of their children. I remember the parents protesting against the local government. I remember that the police treated the parents kindly at first. After a week or so, they turned on the parents. I remember the preliminary reports of why so many classrooms collapsed: insufficient cement in the concrete, insufficient or no reinforcing steel, not enough rock in the concrete, etc. I also remember reports of how the authorities were prematurely demolishing the school buildings to destroy any and all forensic evidence. I remember how the Chinese people personally sending money and aid to those in need in Sichuan province. All of this was reported in the Western media.

I know that the people suffering these calamities, whether in New Orleans or Sichuan, appreciate the valiant efforts of the National Guard soldiers in the US and the PLA soldiers in China.

WKL: “Back in my teens, a new quite extreme Christian movement, similar to and actually supported by Oral Roberts’ church…”

I understand what you are saying there…I really do. In my teens, I witnessed some wierd stuff too – like demon possession – A certain American preacher started a home church and soon he was telling his growing congregation to “speak in tongues,” and to cast out demons. I saw my normal teenage friends went into convulsions while being exorcized.The most talked about Holywood’s mega-hit at the time were “The Exorcist,” circa 1971, and the era ended with another mega-hit, The “Apocalypse Now.” We were sure we were at the brink of WWIII, and would not live to start a family. That was the power of the media and religion.

There were no video games, no internet, no cellphones. The MSM was the source of filtered information, the manipulator of social moral value – even the free press, as you’ve long realized were not all that forthcoming. Also, in those days, there were a lot of reports on miraculous healings etc. On the other hand, there were, as you mentioned, as much anti-superstition / religious books and TV programs which acted as counterbalances – or perhaps mass diversions – while many parts of the world was bathed in blood, with millions starved to death and country after country up in flames: East Timor, Indonesia, Vietnam, Cambodia, central Africa (Angola), and Aparthied S. Africa. etc. Equatorial Guinea was dubbed the “Auschwitz of Africa.” The Cold War and Yellow peril were at their heights, justifying the billions spent on building the America’s Military Industrial Complex.

Some say just Follow the money trail….except the trail is so well covered up most of the time.

How do people out-smart Gov’t Think tanks with all the resources & time to come up with decoys, diversions, plots within plots, dishing out mis & disinformation hourly of every day – with every possible scenario well thought out and contingency plans put ion place etc. A single misstep and the MSM would make sure the whole individual or group Conspiracy theory falls into pieces. I can go on but you already know anyways. This is harder than finding buried treasure even with an antiquated map where x marks the spot safely in your possession.

I don’t drink the Chinese Kool-Aid, either. I wrote over at the Tibet thread (#305) about Ecological Footprint, the Chinese economy and environmental disaster. I am also no fan of consumeristic capitalism.

We face huge global problems such as global climate change, resource wars and ecosystem collapse in this century, if not the next few decades. It tends to make conversations on the DL rather moot. As I mentioned in #305, we are just “rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic”, IMHO.

@facts #202: I appreciate that you would deign (or feign) to acknowledge my post. Based on your comments I guess you don’t intend to compare the Sichuan coverage to the Katrina coverage, simply stating that would have been enough. I thought that by identifying some similarities in the way the media treated the two catastrophes you might have a better understanding of how the western media works (and perhaps why it clashes so strongly with the Chinese government). Your responses tell me that you have little interest in understanding other viewpoints. If, however, you decide you want to talk, you can find me over by the drug dealers and murders.

@William Huang: I’m afraid I have to agree with Jerry#221. I thought that Raj’s mention of the Cultural Revolution was perfectly acceptable after you injected the issue of segregation and racism into the conversation Jerry was having with “Facts” (your post #139). If someone wants to enter a discussion and broaden its scope then I say by all means enter, but please don’t ask that the parameters of the discussion be defined -only- by what you think is fair. A forum such as this means that any comment is open to scrutiny.

@Brad: I appreciate your POV.

@Jerry #223: I’ll keep drinking the Obama Kool-aid if only to hold on to my adolescent idealism a little while longer. It’s a nice feeling after the past 8 years 🙂

@Ted: “I’ll keep drinking the Obama Kool-aid if only to hold on to my adolescent idealism a little while longer. It’s a nice feeling after the past 8 years :)”

Couldn’t agree more. Some of the people out there first said it was impossible for Obama to win because he’s black. Now when he has won, the next remark is that it won’t make a difference. It’s like people desperately don’t want to be believe.

I hope OB proves my pessimism wrong. As my post above in this thread (#180) indicates, while OB talks big, he plays the political game just like it has always been played. And then some. I actually supported him because I can’t stand McCain. He is the “least evil” devil, or lesser of two evils, if you will.

My Jewish upbringing encourages skepticism. One of our favorite mottos is, “Trust no one!” Pretty cynical, eh? 😀 ::LMAO:: There are some people on this thread that I trust even less than that. Ted and WKL, I bet you probably can guess who! 😀 ::really LMAO:: Hint: I think I told these two that I basically gave up on them. I got to stop this before I bust a gut laughing, but it is so therapeutic! 😀

I will be delighted to be proven wrong about OB. We all would win.

“It’s like people desperately don’t want to be believe.” Perhaps, WKL, you desperately want to believe. Touché, monsieur!! 😀 ::LOL::

BTW, as my skeptical Chicago friends are prone to tell me, “Just remember where OB comes from. And under whose political machine he came up through the ranks.” Hmmm. … We aren’t talking race here at all. Also, OB promised to filibuster the revised FISA Bill this year. Then, all of the sudden, at the last moment, he not only drops his filibuster promise, he votes in favor of the bill. Some agent of change.

Let’s hope you are both right. America and the world really need a change.

Back to the original subject, I think this time China threw its toys out of the pram.

On the media bias argument, my view is that ‘no news is good news’. Western media stories are generally negative, regardless of the country involved. Western media often even trash their own country, which is something that rarely happens in China. I accept that there have been stories that have been blatantly made up and unfair, but I don’t think China has been singled out for extra bashing. Rarely have the stories cause so much furore as this year, but I think the appropriate parties have been caught out and slapped on the wrist. China needs to move on, mature, shake off its inferiority complex and victim mentality, and grow a thicker skin, otherwise it’s always going to be a case of ‘them’ and ‘us’.

I agree with some of the skeptic viewpoints – Obama seems to have messianic properties to some. I’m not sure he personally will be able to deliver, I’m more happy for some of the symbolic things with this election, like the fact that a black man won (yeah, people might attack me for such a statement, because you’re not supposed to think of such things, etc), that there is symbolic change after all the Bush years, that the world sees a different face of the US.

Economically, it might just be a little better (I don’t expect the same reckless spending as under Bush). Less of the war rhetoric and hopefully less wars (he has, after all, dared to say that negotiations can be held with Iran and that he can consider dropping the sanctions against Cuba). But in the short run, I expect little change. I guess I’m just happier to see him rather than Sarah Palin’s soulmate in the driver’s seat.

Actually, the people who “desperately don’t want to believe” are in other threads, where they propose some sort of “all countries are bad so we have no ideals” kind of thing. It’s them I’m having a quarrel with… 🙂

I’m happy with the symbolic side of the election as well. Worst case scenario is that he proves to be just like every other politician out there which is still a step away from the idea that it’s just a “white man’s game.” (That came from a student who actually said “I thought only a white man could be President in the United States”).

I don’t doubt any of what you posted Jerry and I’ll be disappointed if GM and friends get bailed out (sounds like that’s guaranteed at this point). But I’d love to regain a little face in the international arena. Man… now I just miss Kool-Aid 🙂

P.S. Re: “Nobama is in bed with the financial industry.” I didn’t see Bank of America on your list in #180. Hugh McColl, former CEO of Bank of America, wrote an article in the Charlotte Observer that brought Obama alot of votes in my neck of the woods, swung my parents firmly into his camp. It’s not a stretch to guess why that letter went out.

Well, Jerry, your “psychological analysis” on people who disagree with you is on the border line of personal attack. Your post #135 is one example. This is a sign of weakness and ignorance. You just made a fool of yourself.

I don’t see “FACTS” is a person in any way as you described in #135 but come to think of it, it fits yourself very well.

@Ted #224

Thank you for your comments.

I have no problem for you to disagree with me and I can respect your point of view. Part of reason I inject myself into was due to the fact that Jerry’s personal attack on ‘FACTS” is uncalled for. We can have difference on fairness but it should not prevent a health discussion. I assume the purpose of the blog is to exchange views.

The another reason I jumped into Jerry’s comment on “FACTS” (#139) is that I don’t agree with him and my own limitation as a human being has the tendency to take “side”. You are no exception either. You have no problem with Jerry’s personal attack on “FACTS”, but when I say Raj was logically inconsistent, you spoke up. Not my kind of fairness.

Your previous comment on my comments being acerbic is on the line and I agree with that.

Is this a cross culture issue? I first heard about this phenomena from my white friend who came to HK because he’d [finally] met a HK guy in Atlanta who was super nice.
It seems that Asians who speak English (or maybe French as well, I dunno) tend to give that impression (of having a chip on their shoulders) on us asian asians living in SE Asia….This doesn’t sound right, but unfortunately that’s the general impression…sorry guys. (Even I, mr. laidback, had been labelled an Angry Asian man before…..WHAT!????)

Allen, Buxi, Admin, William, facts, bt, Jerry, WKL… comment anyone?

Here we have ‘Fresh off the Box’ interviewing Phil….and he actually pretty much explains much of the reasons … He seems pretty mellow to me.

I saw this last night out at Bloomberg. I know that this is from the insidious, evil Western Media. What is worse is that it is American Media. And to further worsen the picture, it is from Bloomberg, owned by Mike Bloomberg, one of my Jewish brethren. And, OMG, he is mayor of New York City. How evil can you get? 😀 ::LMAO:: Is my schadenfreude showing? 😀

Seriously, the Bloomberg article written by John Liu and Stephanie Wong (both live in Shanghai), China Boomtown Withers as Buyers Push Worker Rights (Update1), reports how American buyers, importers, corporations and consumers are actually helping Chinese workers. They are pushing for adherence to the new labor laws. In essence, the Americans are helping Chinese workers secure better wages, better benefits and better working conditions.

Here are some snippets. The whole article is below.

“China’s labor law, introduced Jan. 1, guarantees minimum pay, pensions and health benefits, and caps the number of hours employees can work each week. In Dongguan, the law imposed a 40- hour week, with 32 hours of permitted overtime, and a minimum wage of 1,000 yuan a month, according to China Labor Bulletin, a worker’s rights group based in Hong Kong.”

“Chinese exporters are the latest victims of the global recession as sales slow and buyers in the U.S., Europe and Japan drive prices lower. At the same time, employee wages and benefit costs are rising following demands from customers, including Wal- Mart Stores Inc., that they enforce new labor laws.”

‘ “That is a good thing, says Ding Lihua, a 25-year-old from Sichuan province who’s made shoes in Dongguan for five years.

In the past, factory owners would refuse to pay our wages and there was nothing we could do,” Ding says. “Now if they don’t pay, we sue and then they have to pay or they get fined.” ‘

“Migrant workers from rural China poured into the region to staff the new factories, swelling Dongguan’s population to 8.7 million last year from 1.1 million in 1978. Average annual wages nationwide tripled to 24,700 yuan ($3,600) from 1999 to 2007 as demand for skilled labor grew, government statistics show.”

‘ “To be blunt about it, we manufacturers profit off the workers,” he says. “The only profit we make is on how low we can push the price of labor.” ‘

“The U.S. is really putting us into a dilemma,” says Li, who employs 100 people at his plant in Dongguan, Guangdong province, which makes candy versions of Winnie the Pooh and other Walt Disney Co. characters. “Clients talk about high-quality products and human rights in one breath, and in the next they’re telling us we have to cut prices.”

Chinese exporters are the latest victims of the global recession as sales slow and buyers in the U.S., Europe and Japan drive prices lower. At the same time, employee wages and benefit costs are rising following demands from customers, including Wal- Mart Stores Inc., that they enforce new labor laws.

The crunch may close a fifth of Guangdong’s factories and leave 6 million migrants without work next year, according to the Institute of Contemporary Observation, a labor rights group in the province. That would further slow the world economy because Guangdong accounts for 12 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product and China is the biggest driver of international growth.

The World Bank last week slashed its forecast for China’s economic expansion next year to 7.5 percent, the lowest in almost two decades, citing reduced overseas demand. China has averaged 9.9 percent annual growth for the past 30 years.

Exports Fell

Two-thirds of China’s small toy exporters closed in the first nine months of 2008, according to government statistics. Exports in November fell for the first time in more than seven years, Fan Gang, an adviser to China’s central bank, said at a forum in Beijing today.

“The bankruptcy of small and medium-sized exporters is going to have a huge effect on China’s economy,” says Guan Anping, a former trade official who is now managing partner at the law firm Anjin & Partners in Beijing.

Some 95 percent of exporters with assets of less than 40 million yuan ($29 million) may fail in the next three years, Guan estimates. China’s 42 million businesses of that size provide three-quarters of China’s urban jobs and 60 percent of GDP, according to the government.

Growth in Guangdong slid to 10.4 percent in the first three quarters, 4.3 percentage points less than the same period last year. Signs of the squeeze are littered across Dongguan, which is dotted with factories sitting empty behind padlocked gates.

Labor Law

Boxes of Christmas cards featuring Sesame Street characters are all that’s left at Yongying Factory, where until September 1,000 workers helped supply Hallmark Cards Inc. Court receivers combing the premises said the owner had disappeared.

Higher labor costs are adding to the burden of exporters already squeezed by a rising yuan, and increased prices for raw materials and energy.

China’s labor law, introduced Jan. 1, guarantees minimum pay, pensions and health benefits, and caps the number of hours employees can work each week. In Dongguan, the law imposed a 40- hour week, with 32 hours of permitted overtime, and a minimum wage of 1,000 yuan a month, according to China Labor Bulletin, a worker’s rights group based in Hong Kong.

The new rules increased costs by more than 10 percent at Strategic Sports Ltd., which makes crash helmets for cycling, horseback riding and water sports, says Chairman Philip Cheng. That’s erased profit that was growing 5 percent annually.

The laws are so strict that the company is reluctant to fire workers who fail to perform during their training period, which lasts two to three years.

‘Cheating on Quality’

“If they don’t do well, we dare not fire them,” Cheng says. “Otherwise we have to pay a lot in compensation, which we didn’t before.”

That is a good thing, says Ding Lihua, a 25-year-old from Sichuan province who’s made shoes in Dongguan for five years.

“In the past, factory owners would refuse to pay our wages and there was nothing we could do,” Ding says. “Now if they don’t pay, we sue and then they have to pay or they get fined.”

Bentonville, Arkansas-based Wal-Mart, the world’s biggest retailer, has told its 20,000 suppliers in China to follow the law or be replaced.

“A company that cheats on overtime and on the age of its labor” will “ultimately cheat on the quality of its products,” Chief Executive Officer H. Lee Scott said Oct. 22 at a conference in Beijing.

Wal-Mart’s China spokesman, Jonathan Dong, said the retailer is willing to pay more for goods to ensure its demands are met.

Swelling Population

Cheap labor fuelled China’s growth story as factories made inexpensive toys, shoes and clothes for consumers in the U.S., Japan and Europe. Guangdong’s economy increased 168-fold over 30 years to 3.1 trillion yuan ($451 billion).

Factories sprang up in roadside garages and apartment blocks next to elementary schools. The sky often turned gray from pollution as industrial output rose.

When Li opened Dongguan Fulifeng Food Co. in 1995 he had more orders than he could fill.

“Business was so easy,” says the 44-year-old Taiwanese entrepreneur. “The workers were working 14 hours a day.”

Migrant workers from rural China poured into the region to staff the new factories, swelling Dongguan’s population to 8.7 million last year from 1.1 million in 1978. Average annual wages nationwide tripled to 24,700 yuan ($3,600) from 1999 to 2007 as demand for skilled labor grew, government statistics show.

Hasbro, Mattel

U.S. toymakers Mattel Inc. and Hasbro Inc. have blamed higher worker and production costs for hurting profit. Labor expenses in China rose 30 percent from a year earlier, Hasbro Chief Financial Officer David Hargreaves said in an Oct. 20 conference call to discuss third-quarter earnings. Hasbro makes Transformers action figures and Monopoly.

Some overseas buyers are pushing that burden back onto Chinese manufacturers by seeking lower prices.

“The retail market in the Czech Republic has started to weaken,” Robert Zofka, a director at Czech toy company Jiri Models AS, said during a buying trip to Hong Kong Trade Fair in October. “There’s pressure for us to lower costs, and we will be pushing for better prices from the Chinese suppliers.”

China’s leaders, concerned mass unemployment may trigger unrest, are rolling back some provisions of the new labor law.

The country’s top labor official, Yin Weimin, on Nov. 20 said the government would let local authorities delay minimum wage increases and reduce employer contributions toward unemployment and medical insurance.

Now he’s reconsidering doing deals with U.S. companies after spending hours on the phone haggling with one unidentified buyer over a difference of 0.10 yuan — or 1 1/2 U.S. cents — per kilogram (2.2 pounds) of candy.

“To be blunt about it, we manufacturers profit off the workers,” he says. “The only profit we make is on how low we can push the price of labor.”

I agree with both of you on the symbolic value. Having a black man as president is something I never expected to see. And then to have a Jewish man, Rahm Emanuel, as his Chief of Staff. I never expected to see a Jewish man as the COS for a black president. Then Eric Shinseki, a Japanese American as the head of VA and Bill Richardson, a Hispanic American (his mother and father are from Spain and Nicaragua) as Commerce Secretary. Doug Holder, an African American as AG. And Bush virtually powerless, the perfectly fitting victim of the worst October Surprise of all, the Wall Street financial crisis. All pretty symbolic for me. And best of all, McCain and Palin shot down in flames.

I remember watching the celebration at Grant Park in Chicago, right out on Lake Michigan (Grant Park is the home of the Fields Museum of Natural History and Soldier Field). Now, I really don’t care for Jesse Jackson much, but it was very touching to see him crying tears of joy and disbelief. I had tears in my eyes.

I hope that Obama surprises me by rising above the fray. WKL, I want an end to war, better foreign policy, more effective diplomacy, more fiscal responsibility, and an end to “You’re either fur us or a’gin us” mentality. I want multilateralism, not unilateralism. Ted, I too would like to see an improvement in our international standing. I hope OB proves me wrong on my skepticism.

Well, I looked for Hugh McColl on OB’s bundler list from The Center for Responsive Politics (CRP’s Open Secrets list of Barack Obama (D) Bundlers). I did not find it there. I did not find him on the donor’s list either. Most recent figures (as of 10/15) show that Bank of America employees contributed about $250,000.

Here is a proviso attached to the bundler information at the above link.

While John McCain’s campaign posts bundlers’ employers and occupations, Barack Obama’s campaign does not. The employers displayed for Obama’s bundlers are based on CRP research.

The totals listed in this table are based on CRP research and may not match the contributions visible using our Donor Lookup tool, which searches FEC data based on name and state. Bundlers’ names and ranges based on information available on the candidate’s Web site August 18. Individual contribution data based on data available from the Federal Election Commission on 11/17/08.

I suspect intentional obfuscation by OB’s campaign of the info on the bundlers’ occupations and employers.

Oh so nice to be remembered! I am still around and do browse occasionally, though I have been very busy lately dealing with lots of crap brought forth by le crunch from different companies. Besides, sometimes its good to let others have a go. I am also ruminating on some postings on Taiwan reunification and Tibet, although I am hesitant to give any more space to the latter.

Having said that and coming from an economics background among other areas, I had a few chuckles at Jerry’s, Hemulen and others’ regurgitated and shallow tabloid “economics” on China-EU trade and who would loose more. Also having once had a Jewish girlfriend, I find Jerry’s constant going on and on and on about his Jewish this and Jewish that rather quaint and amusing. Brings back memories of post-dinner discussions with my ex-girlfriend’s father and his attempts at “assimilation” and that “resistance is futile” 🙂

Glancing over the responses to my post, There doesn’t seem to be a major counter-arguement. Ted expressed his desired direction of discussion on comparing Western reporting of Katrina and Sichuan Quake. Some of it is labelling/whining without content, “not willing understand others’ POV”, “revisionist”, or bit of hangup on my word choice, etc. Let me offer my opinions, I fore warn you, you may not like it.

1. I understand Western views fairly well, just that I can’t honestly accept its validity. This is a platform we can explore ideas, but it doesn’t mean I have to accept something I am foundamentally against. The Western views has been discussed and presented in the Western media on a daily basis. The rationale on Western propaganda has been provided many times over. Commercial motive, private ownership, multiple sources, absence of overt gov. censorship, responsibility of China, etc.. None of those changes the fact a massive disinformation campaign is on going. Maybe Westerners should think about the cause of such and device a way to fix it, but not my current concern.

2. Revision of history is a constant phenomena over human existance. The Dark Ages, the colonialism, the slavery, the ethnic cleansing of Native Americans, are all events had been revised from the views at the time of their occuring. Without revision the world would still be living in those times of ignorance. Aren’t we glad revisions of history do happen?

3. Western reporting on China Quake and Katrina. Mostly Ted and others try to show the Western media is ruthless in criticizing its own leaders as well. I don’t deny that, it had to, given the damage such leadership has brought to its own people and the world at large, if it wishes to have even the appearance of objectivity. At the same time, some praises had to be alloted to the Chinese leadership, which was only more pronounced compared to katrina. If the Western media would simple just do that, I would not mind giving it some credit. I don’t think I can.

The spin masters would never give up their wand. As usual, here is the standard practice of Western media in such case, the bad happenings in the Western leadership, scandels, incompetance, lies, corruption, are all treated as failures of individuals or isolated to a certain admin. never even raise the issue of Western institutions that produce and sustain such incompetant/corrupt leadership. The emphasis is given to the balance of institutions if corruption is uncovered, that only validates the strength of Western institutions.

In comparison to China, firstly very few times, any praise should be given to Chinese leaders, any progress in China is always due to the adopting of Western framework and rebellion to the Chinese framework. In extreme cases, such as in Katrina/SiChuan disasters, Western media had no choice but to acknowledge the superior Chinese leadership over that of the US. However, the emphasis is squrely on the cynicism of Chinese leadership, their motive being to perpetuate the oppressive rule of Chinese people, to pacify a preceived angery and mistreated populus, to gloss over the illegitimacy of CCP. The Chinese institutions that produced and sustained such leadership is never mentioned, of cause. More often than not, any popular Chinese leader is protraited as a maverick to the Chinese institutions, hated by ruling class, loved by the people. Whereas, any corruption/scandel/failure in any sector or level of Chinese society is squarely attributed to the “failure” of Chinese institutions at all levels, uncovered corruption is used to instill doubts on Chinese gov. always imply more corruption under the cover. Emphasis is always on the essential illegitimacy of Chinese authority, institutions, indeed the nation state at current form. How to get it across is a matter of form, the expressed content never changes.

Like I said, the essense of Western media reporting on China is denying the legitimacy of the Chinese nation state. Worse yet is the way Western media try to get such idea across, the misinforation, the spinning, the demonization, the rationalization of all forces opposing China, outright lies, etc. Quake reporting is no exception. Given the progress of CCP has led China over the past 60 yrs, given the sordid history of China in the past 150 yrs, how could any Chinese find a shred of affinity to such Western free press? Repulsion to Western media is only too natural.

Again to individual Westerners, I have malice to none, charity for all.

Esther Ku is crazy, she is hot, she is skinnnnny and she is from Chicago. I do like Margaret Cho better. Margaret is more versatile, IMHO. Comes with age and experience.

I am not into beer, but when I do indulge it is Black Butte Porter or Guinness. I am still the warrior.

My two favorite Korean women are Kim Seon-ah, of My Lovely Sam-Soon (I have the DVD set), and Sandra Oh, who is Korean Canadian. And I should mention my friend, Lisa, who was born in Seoul, but grew up in the US and is Korean American. If I did not mention Lisa, she would kill me. Funny how somebody who is over a foot shorter than I can strike fear in my heart.

😀 ::LOL::

I will give some additional thought to your question in #235. I have some thoughts brewing.

“I don’t deny that, it had to, given the damage such leadership has brought to its own people and the world at large, if it wishes to have even the appearance of objectivity.”

You’re trying to apply China’s social mechanisms to the Democratic system.

Wukailong said in #170, “A lot of Westerners have an almost holy concept of the word democracy, and will feel moral indignation if anyone questions it. I don’t agree with this way of thinking, but it is also an explanation for their bad feelings towards China.” I find this a perfectly acceptable explanation and Facts’ comments would suggest it suits that the other side of the equation as well.

@Ted: Yeah, it seems facts is using his understanding of the system he’s living under to understand another. That’s natural, I guess. 😉

As for what facts wrote:

@facts:”Like I said, the essense of Western media reporting on China is denying the legitimacy of the Chinese nation state.”

It seems we are getting somewhere. That’s _exactly_ the same thing that I meant when I said “A lot of Westerners have an almost holy concept of the word democracy, and will feel moral indignation if anyone questions it. I don’t agree with this way of thinking, but it is also an explanation for their bad feelings towards China.”

And you said: “The rationale on Western propaganda has been provided many times over. Commercial motive, private ownership, multiple sources, absence of overt gov. censorship, responsibility of China, etc.. None of those changes the fact a massive disinformation campaign is on going.”

So now you’re actually saying it doesn’t have to be a conspiracy, a sort of directed effort behind this misinformation. Good!

Of course, some things are just funny:

“I don’t deny that, it had to, given the damage such leadership has brought to its own people and the world at large, if it wishes to have even the appearance of objectivity.”

That’s the reason I grew up in horror, under a capitalist system not yet saved by the socialist revolutions (though with some revisionist socialism baked in). My family and I suffered tremendously under the damage from the corrupt government. Later, as I went to China, I’ve seen what real, good leadership can be like. That’s probably why the press here praises it so much.

All joking aside, I actualy agree with a lot of things you say, facts, just not your belief in the good China and the evil West. And like you, I don’t feel malice towards any individual, and honestly don’t care if they are “Westerners” or “Chinese” (or all the other nationalities of the world).

“Glancing over the responses to my post, There doesn’t seem to be a major counter-arguement.”

I think it would be better if you actually read some other posts on this forum after you have written your own stuff. If you only read the things related to yourself and only expect arguments related to your case (which I think everyone here understands), then you miss out on other things – additional background, extra information etc. I’ve given a long description of how I grew up with the concept of media bias in #219, and how my thoughts have evolved on the issue. You’re welcome to comment, facts! And what about that thing “someone” said about India (me, in fact)? It’s actually an invitation to you to think about these things in a little different way.

doesn’t have to be a conspiracy, a sort of directed effort behind this misinformation. Good!

WKL,

Yes..that’s my “suspicion” too..

I say ‘suspect’ rather than ‘believe’ because I have no faith in “god” nor the power that be , esp. those who prepresent the or a god they’d made from the beginning of civilisation. Talk about grand scale conspiracy.

WKL: “not your belief in the good China and the evil West. ”

Matters of facts, good people & fine system do and have gone bad because of greedy and incompetent people, resorting to playing dirty politics to keep or elevate their status quo. And keeping the public in the dark with the help of the media is normal MO – A crucial indespensible practice. Some of you here are in management, you know how that is.

Sure, a few good men emerge every now and then, even a saint or two once in a blue moon, stirring the public, disrupt the humbrum of everyday and wholesale conspiracy which most if not all ruling elites do to it’s subjects. As FOARP correctly pointed out in another thread, that those in the know, those who question whichever system – like many here – should refrain from judging those who dare speak up and risk persecutions, lest by so judging, we ourselves be judged by a higher standard and thus be rendered cowards or even worst, traitors…well, something like that.

“I’ve given a long description of how I grew up with the concept of media bias in #219, ”

Yes, I appreciated that. Thank you for that.

The 911 Commission report is a farse with many gaping holes left unfilled. Also, you r example of one UFO researcher renegade is a bit weak to discount the validity of daily worldwide reportings of such sightings – perhaps only certain ” X-files” urban legends surrounding Roswell. Hollywood is very good at trivialising certain matters by presenting the superficial and ridiculous sides of many a multi-faceted unexplained phenomina which sincere scientific research have yet able to conclude.

“I am not into beer, but when I do indulge it is Black Butte Porter or Guinness. I am still the warrior. ”

Guiness Stout. Yeah, FOARP and I are sure the local Guiness is but a diluted, inferior sissy version of the smooth musculine Irish origin. I dunno about Taiwan, but thank goodness the Irish pubs in HK still serve the real thing, but unfortunately also at the inflated price of US$10 plus 10% service charge, a pint. Therefore, for the same price tag, I normally order two pints of the very smooth Kilkenny draft ale for the price of one at Happy Hour whenever I’m at Someplace Esle, an American style Bar & Grill outlet of the Sheraton in TST.

Jerry, have you been to HK with your daughter to check out the authentic indian restaurents inside Chungking Mansion? Don’t let the name ‘mansion,’ mislead you – the whole place is a dive – but it is one of the most interesting tiny, tiny real estate in HK – I had some of the best Indian rice & mutton Kabab I’d tasted — there at the busy mezzanine two months ago.

Thanks for your responses to facts and William. I have nothing further to say to them. I have said what I need to say to them. To be honest, I find it personally difficult to be civil to them. Oh well.

Touché, Ted, for your comment on multilateral hypersensitivity, “I find this a perfectly acceptable explanation and Facts’ comments would suggest it suits that the other side of the equation as well.” Well said.

WKL, you remarked that “So now you’re actually saying it doesn’t have to be a conspiracy, a sort of directed effort behind this misinformation. Good!” So now we have progressed from conspiracy to a blatant “massive disinformation campaign”. Some progress! I am waiting for him to accuse the West of having launched a massive psyops onslaught. 😀 Maybe we should open an adjunct to the School of the Americas. We will call it the School of China. 😀 At least if we are going to engage in this kind of behavior, we should do this well. “Age Quod Agis!” 😀 ::LMAO::

—————-

Regarding our OB discussions, things have turned very ugly in Chicago and Illinois. You probably remember the warning from my Chicago friends, alluding to corruption in Chicago and Illinois. Well, I mentioned the warning because I was aware of the ongoing investigation into the governor’s office which started in 2003. Already, a number of the guv’s associates and fundraisers have been indicted and/or convicted, including Rezko, Cari, Levine , et al.

Well, it has exploded. Apparently, Patrick Fitzgerald, US Dist Atty, has pulled the plug on Governor Rod Blagojevich, know as Blago. Blago apparently was boasting that he had found the “goose which laid the golden egg”. Allegedly, he was going to sell OB’s soon-to-be vacated US Senate seat for money and an ambassadorship or cabinet position, among other requests. And he was allegedly extorting the Chicago Tribune. That is why Fitzgerald pulled the plug.

The details are now unfolding about various aspects of the investigation (which is still ongoing). Indictments have been issued. Blago was arrested and released on his own recognizance. This is probably going to get uglier. You can follow this, if you would like, in all its sickening details, at the Chicago Tribune site.

Everyone in Chicago and Illinois knows about Henry Hyde’s banking corruption, and the imprisonments of Dan Rostenkowski, Tony Rezko, and Governors Kerner, Walker and Ryan. They all know about the JFK 1960 election scandal in Cook County and the political machines of the previous and current Mayors Daley, father and son. On top of this corruption, the Chicago Tribune has gone into Chapter 11. It is certainly a difficult time for Chicago and Illinois.

This is throwing a taint onto Obama, Emanuel, and even Jesse Jackson, Jr. This is troubling to me. Let us hope that these taints are unwarranted. Maybe this will lead to finally cleaning up the corruption. Who knows?

I agree with you that there is no major counter-argument on your point of view.

The Sichuan earthquake report by western media as an example by itself does not prove or disprove western media bias. Just like one can easily pick one thing from Chinese media that reported something in complete truth, it doesn’t prove Chinese media is unbiased either. We must be careful not to use anecdote to make generalization and avoid a “blind men and an elephant” kind of conclusions.

The key here is that western media is not held accountable to Chinese people for the simple fact that Chinese are not their customers. There is no need for them to be objective about China. It is their customers’ needs that count and their customers hold them accountable. If the western sentiment is biased, the west media will be biased to meet that needs. Keep in mind that news reporting is not a scientific discovery in which the fact has to be repeatable and its conclusion has to be verified.

News reporting is a perception about a reality. However, a perception is not always match to a reality. Particularly, a complicated international politics cannot be explained in just few sentences on a television or few pages of article. This is one of the reasons why US Supreme Court does not allow television because a complicated legal issue can be easily misrepresented. That leaves out a lot of freedom for the media to choose what to say and, equally important, what not to say. That’s where the bias coming in. In addition, too many people in the west nowadays, instead of to be informed, chose to be entertained. But again, the media is just delivering what customers want.

Japanese experienced very similar back lashing in early ‘90’s because of their economic successes. It has nothing to do with democracy, freedom of speech, transparency all that craps. China being democratic will not change a thing. They will come up with something else. French Prime Minister Edith Cresson back then accused Japanese people of being: “the yellow ants trying to take over the world”. I am not accusing Sarkozy anything, but you can guess the possibilities for French thinking of Chinese. So goes the meeting with Dalai Lama.

What comes down to is what you believe. Just because I don’t share the same believe as you do, it doesn’t mean I can prove you are wrong. In this thread, Jerry and Ted certainly have not been able to prove otherwise.

The line of reasoning by Jerry and Ted goes like this: Since we established that you are a criminal (based on their believes), therefore everything you say is likely to be a lie. And therefore we know the truth and we are going to decide what crime you committed. When you protested, they say well, if we are not being fair to you, how come we don’t accuse you of rape, murder, and treason? Right now we are only accusing you of robbery. So here we go, this is our proof and we are fair.

What they have is their believe system which is the democracy. This is the base of their whole argument nothing else. Their only real proof is that democracy has been good for them which is a valid proof. However, their premise is wrong in their argument. They believe that democracy is a license for a monopoly on truth and living in democratic country makes one a better person. From that point on, they can prove why Chinese are dishonest and do bad things.

Well, if I believe in bible so I will also believe that earth is 6,000 years old. From this point on, I can prove that dinosaur could not exist million years ago, Egyptian history cannot be 8,000 years old, the evolution theory is wrong, Charles Darwin and Albert Einstein are fraud, etc, etc, etc.

@William: The problem with facts is not so much one of counter-arguments as that he doesn’t have any argument at all. He has a perception and a viewpoint, with which you can’t argue (all points are met with saying that the basic viewpoint isn’t changed). I agree with parts of the perceptions and some of the viewpoints, but not some of the more extreme things he wrote. You, on the other hand, have arguments and I appreciate that. There’s a big difference between the two of you, even though you might agree in many ways. (And frankly speaking, I feel that this argument you and Jerry are having is kind of sad, because you agree on a lot of things too)

Actually, I don’t believe nothing would change if China became a democracy (where democracy is defined by multi-party system, freedom of speech etc). I think ideology does play a big role, and if China wasn’t construed as “communist”, there wouldn’t be the same kind of fear. The “yellow peril” was invented back in WWI and we have to understand it from the racist and colonialist thought prevalent at the time. Most people are not afraid of an Asian peril (India?).

As whether it’s possible or not to prove a worldview, it’s a good and difficult question. I don’t think it’s impossible to disprove a worldview. Here it comes to how many examples or “facts” you give. In facts’ case, I see only two examples given (Pew report and Sichuan earthquake). The rest is a description of how he views things to be. If Jerry and Ted have presented more examples, and they’ve also put forth problems with the examples he gave, I think they do have a stronger case.

Finally, the other things you write about the Western media resonates with me. Its customers are the mainstream people, and naturally you won’t read much about the plight of minorities, other countries or what foreigners feel like. It’s a bit like the Chinese popular media that has to cater to nationalist sentiments. Over time, as party control lessens, I think we’re going to see the Chinese media becoming very similar to the Western media (it already is in many ways).

“Having said that and coming from an economics background among other areas, I had a few chuckles at …regurgitated and shallow tabloid “economics” on China-EU trade and who would loose more. ”

Pray tell your POVS, Oli. Afterall this thread is about why the high profile reaction to Sarkozy’s and not other EU leaders?

” Brings back memories of post-dinner discussions with my ex-girlfriend’s father and his attempts at “assimilation” and that “resistance is futile”

I think this is true with immigrant Chinese too…
I have a colleague, a young Russian-(half-Jewish) American from NYC, who tells me that she feels that by comparing American & Chinese culture and mentality, she feels greater affinity with Chinese culture in general. I thought that was an interesting realization because I remember telling Jerry the same way back, plus the known fact that the Chinese have long been called the “Jews of the East /Orient.”

“Sure, a few good men emerge every now and then, even a saint or two once in a blue moon, stirring the public, disrupt the humbrum of everyday and wholesale conspiracy which most if not all ruling elites do to it’s subjects. As FOARP correctly pointed out in another thread, that those in the know, those who question whichever system – like many here – should refrain from judging those who dare speak up and risk persecutions, lest by so judging, we ourselves be judged by a higher standard and thus be rendered cowards or even worst, traitors…well, something like that.”

Being a critic of the mainstream is always difficult. I believe it’s hard in any society. From what I’ve gleaned, dissidents in China and non-mainstream critics in the West tend to be a little eccentric. Ordinary people don’t need to – they adjust to the system and live in it, perhaps unhappily at first, but they learn to without too much difficulty. Dissident groups, however, attract everything from real heroes and freedom fighters to the mentally ill. I did research on this weird man in Sweden who would spam forums everywhere with hundreds of kilobytes of text, some of which was unintelligable. Finally, I found out that he was a former dissident from (then communist) Bulgaria, who had moved to Sweden and now faced all the problems with being an immigrant in the same way, calling himself a “free political prisoner.” In short: most dissidents don’t have much of a PR strategy or a clear goal. 😉

“The 911 Commission report is a farse with many gaping holes left unfilled. Also, you r example of one UFO researcher renegade is a bit weak to discount the validity of daily worldwide reportings of such sightings – perhaps only certain ” X-files” urban legends surrounding Roswell. Hollywood is very good at trivialising certain matters by presenting the superficial and ridiculous sides of many a multi-faceted unexplained phenomina which sincere scientific research have yet able to conclude.”

I don’t dismiss UFO sightings. There are two issues here – whether something happened at Roswell and whether it’s related to sightings of unusual aerial phenomena. I think they are not related, but there are still unsolved mysteries. I didn’t want to bring that up here, but I was a member of a UFO organization once and I’ve read extensively about the subject, as well as been in contact with witnesses. Now I’m actually leaning towards the theory that it’s mostly a sort of psychological phenomenon, but I think witness reports should be taken seriously.

Forgive me for interjecting here. Mr. WKL, I think you are right there. Besides UFO, there are all these other left unproved paranormal phenomenon such as bleeding statues of Mary and Jesus, stigmata, or even the hindered releasing of the translations of the Deadsea scrolls. Religious organisations are powerful in that the Mainstream belief system, and the status of established “truth,” must be kept mysterious & thus hard to impossible to challenge. I think the proof of UFO would affect the demise of a lot of faith-based beliefs, and that’s a scary prospect for the powers that be IMHO.

Indeed, alot of things are psychological. Our brains / mind are the creative power – but mostly in the realm of imagination and abstract. Drop some acid or ingest a shroom or two and the whole end-time apocalyptic scenario may unfold before your very eyes. Even the audible voices of god and angels may charge you to herald the coming of calamities and the solution of penance for salvation that’d necessitate the denotion of ones money, things, body, soul and time to such and so. Oldest tricks in the book: Nationalism, religious beliefs, xonophobia – worked beautifully then and still work perfectly well nowadays.

China’s position and reaction to Sarkozy’s meeting with the DL is actually very consistent. Ask the German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who also incidently got a lot of domestic flak for meeting the DL herself and for indulging in “celebrity politics” above the interest of the German State in China’s spending spree in the run up to the Beijing Olympics (and yes I read German).

Tabloid economics, also known as balance sheet economics, which whilst sometimes sufficient for the typical hack, is too often a gross simplification of international trade and economic realities, let alone in the management of a single company (microeconmics vs. macroeconmics). Any trade war in this current age of globalisation is not only unfeasible, but nobody would ultimately benefit in the long term.

But as the long term may never arrive (according to Western economic thought), the current economists’ consensus is that arguably it is China, largely due to its prudence and current stage of development, who is better placed to weather the current crisis or potential trade war with Europe in the short term and it is Europe who will suffer more. The adage that those who have more will also have more to loose holds true and trade war is often a war of attrition rather than Blitzkrieg.

To appreciate exactly why, one needs to consider factors such as the nature of Europe’s economy and its social, political and economic “infrastructure”. The political, social and economic tools available to EU states, such as interest rates adjustments, labour market re-alignment etc., coupled with considerations for inflationary, political, social and legal constraints. Other issues also involve comparative economic advantages, labour market/price flexibility/elasticity, other economic infrastructure flexibility, ease of access to and availability of natural resources, degrees of self-sufficiency etc. Many, many books can be written about all these subjects.

Consequently, its not just about the worth and value of each party’s exports and imports, as if its that laughably simple. Simply switching over what Europe buys today from China to buying it from other countries is NOT as simple as toggling a light switch. If that was the case the discipline of development economics would have been redundant long ago.

In actual fact, notwithstanding potential hardship for the individual, the current economic crisis is imho also a blessing in disguise for China, who has a very long way yet to go in its economic development which in turn means many more opportunities for both domestic and foreign companies.

Consequently, trade wars and boycotts, like nuclear weapons, find their greatest worth in its symbolism, being the currency of politics and international diplomacy, while its indiscriminate mass usage is ultimately self-defeating for all concern.

As for comparing Chinese and Jewish culture, my ex Jewish girlfriend recommended me the book “Bridge Across Broken Times: Chinese and Jewish Cultural Memory” by Vera Schwarcz, which you may find interesting, but which I unfortunately have not yet have the time to buy or read. Though knowing my ex, I’ll likely find it as a Christmas present.

@William Huang #248: “The line of reasoning by Jerry and Ted goes like this: Since we established that you are a criminal (based on their believes), therefore everything you say is likely to be a lie.”

That simplistic bit of sophistry –absolutely does not represent– my line of reasoning and if you’re still misinterpreting (and misrepresenting) my comments at this point, then I see little reason to continue. The way you and Facts treat other people’s opinions make it extremely difficult to engage in a dialogue, hence my shorter and shorter responses. Jerry saw where all this was going early on and jumped ship, I’m with him.

Thank you for your comment. I do agree with many things you said. If anyone has behaved as a gentleman, you are. However, I do want to follow up on few comments related to your points.

I do share “facts” frustration but I don’t share some of his point of view. That said, I don’t think his lack of example is an issue and it all depends on the point of his argument.

Let me use an analog. Let’s say Jerry and Ted made a statement, “all swans are white”. What “facts” needs is a single example of black swan to refute and the whole statement becomes false. He does not need two or more. At the same time, no matter how many white swan examples Jerry and Ted can present, it will not make their statement to stand on its feet. You can have a situation that one the one side, “facts” has only one black swan with Jerry and Ted has millions of white swans on the other side. The statement “all swans are white” is always false. The size of number on each side is irrelevant. The same applies to “facts”. If he claims that “all swans are black”, all Jerry or Ted need to produce is one white swan to make his statement false.

Now, if “facts” makes a statement, “not all swans are white”. This statement is always true like before as long as he has one example of black swan, not matter how many white swan examples Jerry and Ted can add on the pile, it won’t make his statement any less true than before. If you exchange the word “swan”, “white”, and “black” with “west media”, “unbiased” and “biased” respectively, you can see where their argument is going. Of curse, this is just an analog.

The actual situation is not that simple. I don’t think “facts” claimed that western media is always biased against China and likewise, I don’t think Jerry and Ted claimed that western media never biased against China either. The trick is in what’s the implied in each of their statement and argument. If there is agreement among them that major west media organization was biased against China, say on March Tibet riot, then “facts” can use this one example to refute anyone’s claim that “west media never biased against China”. He has no need to have another and no matter how many examples someone can produce to show that they are fair on matters like Sichuan earthquake.

I have not looked into the details to make any judgment in this respect and I let you guys to sort it out. Nevertheless, my point here is that the number of example should not be an issue. With only two samples in his hands does not necessarily make “facts” points any weaker. Likewise, more examples do not necessary make opposing view any stronger. It all depends on the validity the statement intend to cover and the logic that the argument follows.

I don’t have ill felling towards westerners at all, nor I think Chinese are better than anyone. I believe that if the situation is reversed, Chinese will do the exactly the same. The problem I have is this double standard with self-imposed superiority with some of westerners. Jerry and I may agree on many facts but we have a lot of disagreement on principles. To me, no one is on a higher moral ground to anyone, not just for this thread in discussion but things in general. The very essence of freedom is not being treated differently by one’s political view, his country of origin, race, ethic group, etc. People from west should know better. Some of their behavior on this thread is a disappointment. I do appreciate Ted’s point that my comment is bit acerbic and I am trying to make my tone somewhat more “even-tempered”.

Ted, if I offend you, I apologize. This is no my intention at all. However, I did read your post on #137 to draw that conclusion. Maybe I confused your cut and paste from others to mistake yours. Right now I am not sure. I also think some your comments on ‘facts’ is not fair at all but I will all get back to you tomorrow to state my reasons. You can pick word by word where did I go wrong. I just cannot do this today.

I also need to phrase my wording better per your suggestion which means it will take longer than I used to. In any event, I do think you have behaved like a real gentleman and it’s only fair for me to return the same way.

So sorry you had to go through that. Fortunately or not, I have already seen this kind of progressive illogic in my life before. So I bailed.

I am very familiar with the philosophical “black swan” of inductive reasoning and logic. I am also familiar with Taleb’s “Black Swan”. He is a student of one of my favorite mathematicians, Mandelbrot. I don’t understand how William could bring the “black swan” into this discussion. Another disconnect, IMHO. Our conversations with William and facts were more like Taleb’s Black Swan, a convergence of the unexpected.

Er, please don’t dismiss the “black swan” thing. 😉 It actually helps to straighten out the discussion a little bit.

First of all, many of facts’ statements are statements about how things are, a sort of theory. Examples include:

“The Western propaganda tries to equal Chinese to Han, so anyone is not Han is not Chinese, therefore to incite separatism in China” (claim: Western propaganda has the motive of splitting China)
“Chinese government consistantly ranked HIGHEST in satisfaction ratings by her citizens in the world many years in the roll. Do you ever hear this mentioned in Western media? I don’t think so.” (claim: No Western media outlet published the results of the Pew report)
“there IS a willful determination to keep Western public misinformed and remain hostile to China by the Western media” (claim: Western media has a secret agenda to keep people misinformed about China)

The second statement qualifies very much like a “all swans are white” claim, which I showed was false. Then facts said that this doesn’t matter, it’s just a small counterexample. Ditto for the earthquake thing. I can’t see how he has backed up any of his other claims.

If facts just claims media bias in general, I have no problem with it at all.

The “black swan problem” is legitimate inductive logic. I would never dismiss the proper use of that logic. It’s just that William’s use of that logic did not make sense in his arguments, or “sophistry”, as Ted said. Your example makes sense, WKL. And the very fact that IHT was part of the Pew team invalidates fact’s statement/conclusion right from the starting line. And then he changed arguments and assumptions. Oy vey! Hence, I bailed 😀

And at the risk of pissing off Oli here, we Jews have been subjected to this kind of illogic for a long time. For example, just look at the “Christ Killer” illogic and arguments.

Sorry, Oli, “Jewishness” is just a “quaint” part of me and when I feel like it, I write about it. Writing helps me learn more about my Jewish roots, and I like that. I think of it as a journey of the soul and heart. It is different from academic knowledge. Oli, maybe your written meanderings help you learn about yourself? I don’t know. I just know my writings help me learn more about myself. Mazel tov, Oli. 😀

But then again, what do I know? I am just an evil Western devil. And proud of it. ::LMAO:: 😀

First of all, after careful study, I agree with you that put your name in that statement (post #248) “The line of reasoning by Jerry and Ted goes like this: Since we……..” is a stretch and I take back.

However, I do want to say that I wasn’t totally reckless just to be disrespectful. So before I start, let me list what I think the whole argument started and how it was evolved. It will help to explain my train of thought coming from:

It is my impression that the whole things starts out from Chinatalk #56 and #58 about Tibet and west intervention and followed by ecodelta#60 which led to “facts” #66. Then this whole west media bias business started from here. I need to mention this just to be fair to you that I am not taking things out of context.

Ted said:
For those who argue that it’s all western propaganda why can’t you also consider that the “western” media’s practices simply don’t work in China. I’m tired of being thrown back on my heels by accusations of propaganda when no one will acknowledge that right now China just doesn’t want serious investigative journalism.

William Huang:
I don’t agree “facts” point of view that west media is conspired against China therefore it’s all propaganda. That’s said, I don’t agree with your point of argument either. Even though you didn’t say it directly, but you first sentence seems imply that by the fact that “western media” doesn’t work in China somehow is the reason for western media bias. The second sentence implies that “facts” cannot accuse western media bias unless he acknowledges that China is not practicing investigative journalism.

In other words, “facts” made an “all swans are white” type of statement as Wukailong #259 pointed it out. Instead of make a “black swan” case, you counted with current media reporting problem in China. In this black swan analog, media practice in China is not a “swan”.

Chinese media practice (whatever it is) and western media bias don’t have to be mutually exclusive. They can co-exist. To prove or disprove one does not disprove or prove the other. I do agree with Jerry’s assessment that had China being more open, the western media bias could be been less severe. But this is a practical consideration for China to consider and it does not prove western media is biased. It is exactly the opposite. If western media can not be fair unless they have complete access, it only proves that western media is biased.

Yes, complete access helps better reporting but it does not prevent bias. Likewise, you can still report what you know fairly without complete access.

For example, many Iraq war military operation details were never allowed to report for very good reason (keep military secret, protect solder’s life, etc.) but it does not give media the right to falsify information. Can you image a Chinese media reports misinformation on Iraq war and when US public protested, Chinese media say, well, your government restricted our access?

Western media has no excuse for their bias on Tibet independent issue. The information and documents concerning Tibet independent legitimacy is far beyond China. Chinese history is an open book. The fact that all countries recognize China’s sovereignty is not something Chinese government can fabricate.

Your frustration towards “facts” on his complain about western media description on China as multi-ethnic nation is not really fair. You either took his words out of context or you didn’t do your home work. If you follow from the beginning, say ecodelta#60. He does have a point. His point is simple. Western media described Chinese as such a distinctive ethnicity (implicitly or explicitly) and Tibetans people are so foreign to Chinese that China invaded another independent country. It only happens to the matter of Tibet and you will see such subtlety to make desired impression. A sophistry, if you will.

Tibet issue is beyond the scope of this post, my point here is that “facts” did not make complains without a proper cause.

I hope my answer is satisfactory to you (I don’t mean you have to agree). Again I recant my statement in #248 and I do not want to turn a discussion into a shouting match.

Liang -Chichao the reformer reminded people a hundred years ago during the period of invasion by western and Japan military regime in china, he said accurately that big powers will first demonized the culture, the leaders, the patriots of a country before the physical attack. These demon will cultivate foot soldiers in the press (now in the internet of course) to propagate story about their superiority in culture, religion, and human right eventhough they keep slaves at home. These propaganda will continue day in and day out until the time is ripe for actual military action.
I find his observation true until today.
I bet some writers here are agents like what Liang was talking about to demonize china for their paid master. There is nothing special about it. Except it is too late to misleasd and to invade. Chinese have learned their history, and in this internet age they know the truth very fast. There is just no room for agressor in this new enlightened age. And I can tell you chinese are astonishingly united across the globe. This is my perspective in Nanyang.

@Shel – The only time I have encountered Liang Qichao in the past he seemed to be a thinker in the mold of George Bernard Shaw, or H.G. Wells (or Ezra Pound, at a stretch): a clever man, but deeply wrong, and not just a little bit racist. However, I have not read that much of his works: are there any essays you might point me towards?

I agree with you. There is an implied circular logic in some westerner view and it goes like this: Because China is not democratic, therefore the government does not speak for people and suppresses people, and therefore such government is inherently immoral.

I have no problem with this kind of logic (believe system aside). However, when Chinese people support their government’s action, the westerners are not happy and say, how can you support a repressive government?

With this circular logic, they hope to deny Chinese people’s basic rights such as national security, sovereignty and economic interest. Chinese people’s individual right and freedom in China is the last thing on their mind.

The same goes to supporters of Tibet independent movement. Very little concern gives to Tibetan people in Tibet. The separation from China is more important even it means to support a theocratic and repressive government such as Dalai Lama’s. There is hardly any discussion of Tibetan individual rights under Tibet Government in exile.

If democracy can be implemented in varying degree, current Chinese government is much more democratic than Dalai Lama and his government. The very basic argument many westerners including government insisted upon is that fact that many Tibetans see Dalai Lam as God and willingly do whatever he says (which is by no means remotely democratic). Therefore, Dalai Lama represents the best interest of Tibetan people. But when it comes to China, what Chinese people want won’t matter. The issue is always the Chinese government not being elected even the current governmnet does represent the best interest of Chinese people.

As Ted (#22) correctly pointed out, Chinese government is only serving the best interest of Chinese people on this Sarkoy meeting with Dalai Lama. By undermining legitimacy of Chinese government, some westerners hope to create an anti-Chinese sentiment on anything with respect to international affairs which in turn allowing their own government to take advantage of Chinese people.

This double standard goes beyond diplomatic dispute. For example, very few Americans will admit their government is capable to torture, and murder let lone being repressive against its own people. But it happens all the time. They will say it’s just some bad apples in the government. For torture, they call it police brutality and for murder, they call it CIA activity. To them democratic government as a concept can do no wrong. It’s just some bad individuals.

So starting from Watergate, every bad thing government did is assigned with the word, “gate” to it. This way, the problem in government always ends up clean and all the sins are washed down with the scapegoat.

On the other hand, there is no such thing as bad apple in China. Everything bad happened is China’s doing. To draw a parallel to this double standard, it is like religious confession; your evil deeds are okay as long as you confess and you can have a clean start all over again. If you don’t confess, you are bad and you will go to hell. The difference is, most Chinese don’t believe in confession.

Another excellent example of MISREPRESENTATION of someone else’s belief system by the advantage of incompatibility. The defendent of Islam in this case is clearly quite incompetant linguistically for the rigors of such debates. Whereas with Ben Stein, with the relative abscence of cultural and language barrier, the same Richard Dawkins is unable to exhibit similar wit, and in fact finds himself stumbling and at his wit’s end, even finally conceding to I.D. propositions. (BTW I am an agnostic)

I just knew you were opening “Pandora’s Box” with that link. And sure enough, they opened the lid. 😀

There is no way around Chinese ideologues, or for that matter, any ideologues. C’est la vie. To any ideologue, it is “us against them”, the evil “them”. They put “them” in a box. It is their version of the “Bush Doctrine”. So much easier, so much simpler to argue that way. Unfortunately, so unrealistic. Life is much more complex.

Most Americans think little about China, as far as I know. When I tell my American or European male friends about Taiwan or China, the first thing out of their mouths is, “Have fun with those hot Chinese babes!” America seems to be the land of the Asian fetish.

I appreciated those videos. Stein plays a wonderful “devil’s advocate”. Methinks he is perturbed about the possibility that there is no God. Not all Jews think alike, fortunately. The Muslim imam was funny. His logic is so teleological (not necessarily the religious meaning here, just the spirit of teleology. Logic which serves the purpose of justifying a person’s beliefs). Nonetheless, he is sincere. I don’t agree with Dawkins on everything. But he is thought-provoking. I am a cosmologist who rejects the notion of the “theistic god”. So maybe that makes me an atheist, whatever that is. I am not even sure what a cosmologist is. I am just a WIP (Work In Progress)!

Regarding teleology, it seems to be practiced here on this thread and elsewhere on FM by ideologues, and they take it so seriously. It is such corrupted logic! Oy vey! It is a source of amusement. Sometimes frustration. But you just can’t fight “City Hall”.

Have a good Christmas and/or happy Hanukkah (starts at sundown on 12/21). I will keep the menorah lit. Think of it as the Jewish Christmas and Jewish Christmas tree. ::LMAO:: 😀 Judah Maccabeus is rolling over in his grave. Sorry, Judah, just having fun with the gentiles (goyim). Mea culpa!

@Ted (#267): I agree with you! 🙂 The point with this was that both sides have their problems. I don’t think Dawkins is arguing excellently, it’s just funny to see some similarities. It is a perfect example of a frustrating conversation where both parties are too far apart to really be able to have a discussion.

I don’t have that experience with William Huang (I guess I have a more positive impression of him than you and Jerry do), but I do have it with some others on this thread, and when shel seriously believes some people here are agents for some future Western invasion, I first thought that there is not point in answering. Then I found this video and thought “well, why not post it.”

“However, when Chinese people support their government’s action, the westerners are not happy and say, how can you support a repressive government?”

It depends on what the support is for, of course. I can’t represent any Westerner really because I’m not in the mainstream. If the Chinese government is supported for all the good things it has done, then I’m all for it. If people support repressive practices, then I’m against it.

“With this circular logic, they hope to deny Chinese people’s basic rights such as national security, sovereignty and economic interest. Chinese people’s individual right and freedom in China is the last thing on their mind.”

I don’t think this is what most people have on their mind. Perhaps some leaders have hidden agendas and truly want China to be chaotic (I don’t believe this a bit, but I include it because it is a deeply held belief by some here), but I’m pretty sure about how most Westerners arguing for human rights in China (either journalists or ordinary people) think, and they do not think in this way.

“The separation from China is more important even it means to support a theocratic and repressive government such as Dalai Lama’s.”

Why would DL go back to Tibet and resume things exactly like they were before the 50s? If the Chinese government can make a U-turn and begin to support capitalism and reform instead of communism and revolution, then why can’t the DL? Of course people can say he’s just a liar, but I think it’s better to have some sort of trust in him when he speaks about modern forms of governance, in the same way that I have trust in CCP when they talk about political reform (albeit limited).

Imagine if Taiwanese used this argument against the CCP: “Will you have a cultural revolution, a great leap forward and people’s communes if we reunite?”

“Therefore, Dalai Lama represents the best interest of Tibetan people. But when it comes to China, what Chinese people want won’t matter.”

I agree with this. There is a disparity here.

“For example, very few Americans will admit their government is capable to torture, and murder let lone being repressive against its own people. But it happens all the time. They will say it’s just some bad apples in the government. For torture, they call it police brutality and for murder, they call it CIA activity.”

I thought Americans were more open-minded, but never mind. Personally, I have very little belief in the concept of “bad apples” or “huairen” _anywhere_. If Americans or Chinese in general like the concept of “bad apples”, then I feel sad for them.

I think police brutality is a very real problem. It exists in any society because the police is really accountable to no one. That’s where all problems start, basically, in any government. I hope we can all agree to this.

@Jerry: “I appreciated those videos. Stein plays a wonderful “devil’s advocate”. Methinks he is perturbed about the possibility that there is no God. Not all Jews think alike, fortunately. ”

Jerry, Funny you should mention, “Not all Jews think alike, fortunately, ” because I have yet to meet a religious Jew in China. For too long, the Christians have been Misrepresentating “most great scientists, including Newton & Einstein as theists, or that the majority of America’s founding fathers to be men of god,” which of course is totally bogus.

@WKL: “It is a perfect example of a frustrating conversation where both parties are too far apart to really be able to have a discussion.”

WKL, I too appreciate your youtube link. I was a fan of Richard Dawkins for but a few months because I soon found him to be as much an ideoloque and a dogmatist.

@Tom: I find it kind of saddening that Dawkins has his fanatical viewpoints and one-sided perspective, because he’s really a good writer and speaker. I first refused to read “The God Delusion” but then gave it a chance, and it’s a good read – though very misguided in many ways.

Wukailong said:
It depends on what the support is for, of course. I can’t represent any Westerner really because I’m not in the mainstream. If the Chinese government is supported for all the good things it has done, then I’m all for it. If people support repressive practices, then I’m against it.

William Huang:
I agree with you. My point here is limited to international conflict such as Tibet, friction with France, etc not everything in general.

Wukailong said:
I don’t think this is what most people have on their mind. Perhaps some leaders have hidden agendas and truly want China to be chaotic (I don’t believe this a bit, but I include it because it is a deeply held belief by some here), but I’m pretty sure about how most Westerners arguing for human rights in China (either journalists or ordinary people) think, and they do not think in this way.

William Huang:
I am sure you are not but some do as some people have demonstrated on this blog. I do believe majority of people around the world want peace. I never had ill feeling about western people in general and I never point my finger at them. The problem is a small group of people who do. Many of them are in influential positions such as government and media. Sometimes, this is just enough to cause the problem. The sad part is that the world has never been run by the majority of people. Otherwise we won’t have all these wars and killings.

Wukailong said:
Why would DL go back to Tibet and resume things exactly like they were before the 50s? If the Chinese government can make a U-turn and begin to support capitalism and reform instead of communism and revolution, then why can’t the DL? Of course people can say he’s just a liar, but I think it’s better to have some sort of trust in him when he speaks about modern forms of governance, in the same way that I have trust in CCP when they talk about political reform (albeit limited).

William Huang:
I agree that DL and his government won’t go back to the way exactly like before 50s and anything is possible in the future. I will give them a benefit of doubt. Nonetheless, I am only referring to the current practice by him and his government.

For example, the way he treated his own people who practiced Dorjee Shugden deity is not exactly western style of religious freedom. There were human right violations even killing involved. You would see a western leader meeting Chinese leader express their concerns on human rights in Tibet but you don’t see them mention anything about Tibetans human right under Tibetan government in exile. The western media keeps an closed-eye attitude about it.

BTW, what really cracks me up is the fact that Dalai Lama retained his Nazi SS German friends, Heinrich Harrer and Bruno Beger as advisors in his government has not stopped his Jewish admirers.

Wukailong said:
I thought Americans were more open-minded, but never mind. Personally, I have very little belief in the concept of “bad apples” or “huairen” _anywhere_. If Americans or Chinese in general like the concept of “bad apples”, then I feel sad for them.

William Huang:
Americans are very open-minded about their government on all domestic issues but not when it comes to foreign policy. For example, to many conservative Americans, Bill Clinton is an evil man. Everything he did is against their values. From abortion, gun rights, gay rights, tax and his lie about his affair. However, very few had problem with his international polices at least they don’t think he is immoral. If anything he was not good enough, it will be he wasn’t tough enough on enemies. So there is this huge discrepancy about a man who does nearly everything evil at home but he is a good man towards outside.

As for the rest of you comments, I agree with you.

A side track of our discussion since you mentioned you experience in Chinese directness. Let me give you two examples for your reference.

The Chinese word, “Ni-Zhen-Hao” is an affectionate word used to express the gratitude by a person at the receiving end of a kindness and caring. It is more equivalent to English word, “You are so kind” or “You are so wonderful”. But most of Chinese speak English by literal translation word by word because the grammar is very similar. The literal translation word by word in English is “you are real good”. In America, this word has certain judgmental if not patronizing under tone.

You can image the disappointment when an American hears from Chinese husband who said to him: “You are real good” after all the helps he has done to get the husband’s wife to the hospital emergency room.

The Chinese word “Ni-Pang-Ler-Yi-Dian” means you have gained little weight. It is often used when close relatives or old friends meet again after a while. In old days, it is a complement to your happiness and content for living well. In new age, it may also mean you gain little weight, be careful. It is still widely used by old generations and for them it creates a friendly mood. It is an essential a friendly word. The literal translation in English is “you are getting little fatter”. To many Americans, this is a plain insult.

WKL, thanks for the Utah Wackos vs. Moore link. Fortunately, not all Utahans are wacko. Nor are all Mormons. Not all Mormons are ideologues. Not all Mormon bishops are ideologues.

Some comments:

The leaders of any ideology, for the most part, seem to sell fear to their sycophantic, ideological followers. It keeps their followers in line. The most strident seem to also sell hatred, the bogeyman and anger. “Got to resist all those evil, demonic heathens who are intent on “destroying our great people”.” 😀

The ghost of Joe McCarthy and HUAC lingers, unfortunately.

I find that I can only take so much of Dawkins. He is too strident for my tastes. His comments, in principle, on the Jewish god, Yahweh, are spot on. Jewish ideologues used that view of God to help keep the Jews in line.

I can listen to Chomsky easily. Dawkins I can take only in small doses; that’s all. Tom, he just gets too carried away; I agree with your characterization of Dawkins as ideologue and dogmatist. Stein knew that about Dawkins. He used it to trap him. Maybe the old saw applies here, “Choose your enemies wisely. You will become them.” BTW, WKL, I have never read “The God Delusion”.

Tom, I don’t know much about Newton’s religious takes, but Einstein was a cosmologist. Theism and science clash (No, ID is not a science 😀 ). Einstein did not believe that the Israelites were/are God’s chosen people. BTW, I usually refer to theism as “god in a box”.

Then there is the ideologue, John Hagee, and his group, Christians United for Israel (CUFI). IMHO, Hagee and CUFI are dangerous wackos. He scares me. He is using Israel as a political weapon against all infidels and heathens (in his opinion and judgment). Hagee seems a very unpleasant man.

Tom, you mentioned, “have yet to meet a religious Jew in China.” Well, Jews form a broad spectrum from the ultra-Orthodox to non-observant like me. By nature, I am not a joiner, so being non-observant comes easy. How I lasted at Microsoft, I will never understand. There are other reasons for my non-observance and the non-observance of my dad and grandfather. It is rooted in the horrible treatment by ideological Jews and rabbis of their own fellow Jews. That happened in Russia. Long story which I will not go into now. Maybe never. Very painful.

BTW, IMHO, the Gnostics had a very cosmological view of god. No wonder the theists bumped them from the Catholic Church. They just did not fit into the theists’ power scheme.

@William Huang: I find myself in agreement with just about everything you wrote in your last post, so I’ll happily stop here. 😉

There are some things I have too little knowledge of, American conservatives being one of them. I’ve tried to understand the conservative viewpoint just like I think I grasp the modern Chinese state ideology. The latter I’ve done mostly by being here, and I think I get it (even on an emotional level, especially with regards to Taiwan and Hong Kong). As for American conservatives, I feel I have to adopt quite a simple view of the world, thinking in terms of black and white, to really feel there could be anything to it. Perhaps that shows I still haven’t understood it properly.

The idioms you mention are interesting. It takes some time to really get into that when learning a language. I remember back in the 90s when I was in Beijing studying Chinese, and two young Chinese men tried to get in touch with a white woman (I saw this while sitting in a canteen). One of them said: “Ni de lianse zhen hao!” As her Chinese wasn’t good enough, she looked perplexed and the other guy followed up with the literal translation: “Your facial color is very good!” I don’t remember exactly what happened afterwards, but I think she looked consternated and one of them said something like “you look healthy”.

Another not so funny example in the other direction was when a silly European guy who had just learned a little Chinese got into his first discussion with a Chinese woman. He had drawn a map of China, without Taiwan, and she complained and said: “Taiwan ne?”. He responded, laughingly:
– Boo Jung-gwo! Boo Jung-gwo! (Not China! Not China!)

Tom, I tend to differentiate between evangelists and fundamentalists. Now, I am not going to get out my Venn diagrams to figure out the union of the sets, but there is probably a good deal of crossover. IMHO, Billy Graham is an evangelist. Preaching the gospel, but not shoving it down people’s throats. Much appreciated on my part.

Steven Anderson is an ideological fundamentalist, for sure. Billy Graham going to hell? Billy Graham as the devil incarnate? I could only take the first minute before I shut it down. Typical ideologue who wants a binomial answer: yes or no, right or wrong. Scary.

“Excerpt from the sermon preached by Pastor Steven L Anderson at Faithful Word Baptist Church in Phoenix, AZ, independent, fundamental, soul-winning, King James Bible preaching

This sermon biblically proves Billy Graham is not just a false teacher but a heretic on his way to hell.”

1 John 3:13 “13Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you.”
Billy Graham is loved by the world which is one proof he isn’t saved.

He has also stated you can go to heaven other ways than through Jesus and said hell is not a literal burning place.
John 14:6 “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”

If a person doesn’t believe in a literal hell then what are they being saved from?
Ephesians 2:8 “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:”

Video interviews with Larry King and Robert Schuller helped showed us Billy Graham’s true colors. The truth is he was never fundamental but always a compromising ecumenical preacher. He has always praised the Catholic Church and all Protestant denominations. He even made the statement something special can happen at infant baptist which will help make the child a Christian much like the Lutherans and Catholics teach.

Wow, Steve, that is convincing, uplifting, hubristic, egotistical, delusional and humble. 😀 ::LMAO:: Another gutless fool promoting teleological reasoning as scientific proof. Not even close, not even the same universe. I guess that means I am going to hell. I would rather go to my own hell than your heaven, Steve.

I don’t know what percentage of fundamentalists are ideologues?

Woody Allen is not my cup of tea. Except for the Mighty Aphrodite. He was a scream and so was F. Murray Abraham.

“Video interviews with Larry King and Robert Schuller helped showed us Billy Graham’s true colors.”

Hehe, that reminds me of a documentary I saw once of a liberal branch of KKK that refused to “use the N word” and would tour the US and talk about the greatness of the white race and how sad it would be if it died out. It seemed a little silly to me and the program wasn’t that much fun, until in the end when this tall guy with long hair and beard appeared, introduced as belonging to one of the more hardcore factions. When shown the video with the liberal branch, he shook his head and said: “These people don’t get it. You don’t talk like that in the klan. Here’s what it should sound like”, and they showed a video of himself endlessly yelling obscenities against blacks and jews.

” I could only take the first minute before I shut it down. Typical ideologue […] Scary.”

LOL. That was exactly my sentiment and I too had to shut it down within the first minute as David Bowie’s song, “Scary monster, super creep,” came on and kept repeating itself in my head.
What kind of fxcked up environment spawn such monstrous biggotry? Ironically, my very first American friend was from where the said pastor is from, but unlike the Reverend Anderson, my buddy was an internationalist, made friends with everyone, spoke perfect French, and was quite a Casanova in his youth.

“The truth is he was never fundamental but always a compromising ecumenical preacher. He has always praised the Catholic Church and all Protestant denominations.”

As I said, I am an agnostic despite the fact that I grew up in a Methodist home. I remember my Mom once said, of all the evangelical celebrities, Billy Graham was the most balanced. Her younger brother, my uncle, was a Baptist pastor, whom my Mom was very disappointed with, because according to her, money was his god.

Later in those glorious years when suddenly American evangelical celebrities and Catholic priests were one after another exposed of money frauds, sexual crimes and gross hypocracies, I begun to question all established religions.

Decades later, things got worst, culmunating (having reached its apex, I hope) with the first born-again President, George W. Bush.

Ah, yes. F. Murray Abraham, who played the very memorable character of Antonio Salieri in Amadeus. I kinda have an impression that he also had, among other great villainuous roles, acted as a very scary high Inquistor or Mafia kingpin. Was it in Al Pacino’s Scarface? A brilliant actor indeed.

Ha ha, The Mighty Aphrodite also happens to be one of my favorite Woody’s flicks., so is Bullets over Broadway, and many others.

Tom, speaking of “old-time” religion, did you ever see, “A River Runs Through It”? Life, religion, a minister, his wife and 2 boys, and fly-fishing in Montana. I love that movie. I love the book, on which it was based, by Norman Maclean. Redford had to talk like a Dutch uncle to get the rights to the movie.

WKL, I never knew that the KKK had a “PC” branch? You learn something new all the time. Kind of like the liberal “nice Nazis”. If they ever existed, which I doubt, I can just imagine the motto now, “Eugenics with heart and caring. Or, a kinder, gentler Übermensch!” Wow. 😀 ::LOL:: I think Mel already parodied that in “The Producers”. His choice of Dick Shawn for the role of Hitler was genius.

HKer, I have no idea where this crap comes from. Possibly lurking in the deep recesses of our souls and psyches? It would be interesting to hear Freud’s and Nietzsche’s takes on this. Of course, if they could speak English, at least for my benefit? I wonder how this all fits with Übermensch and “childhood sexuality”?

Tom, “money was his god.” Oh yeah, give me some of that Prosperity Theology and Gospel. 😀 ::LMAO:: I know people who buy this sad crap. I have brothers who buy this crap. Really sad!

I, too, hope that Bush is the apex. I wonder, though?

I think F. Murray Abraham is a brilliant villain and actor, too. I remember him as Salieri in Amadeus. He played the Grand Inquisitor in “The Name of the Rose”, with the equally brilliant Sean Connery. He and Connery again played together in “Finding Forrester”, FMA as the villainous, arrogant teacher, Professor Crawford, and Connery as the reclusive writer, Forrester. I have seen Amadeus a few times, but the other two I have watched many times.

Basil Rathbone, Alan Rickman and John Malkovich are also brilliant villains and actors. I enjoy their work.

With all this talk of fundamentalism and evangelism, Neil Diamond’s song, “Brother Love’s Travelling Salvation Show” is playing in my head. 😀 ::snicker:: I love the irony of it; a Jewish kid from NYC singing about that “old-time, fire-breathing” religion. ::LMAO::

I agree with you that this west media thing has drawn too long and we should end here.

I also didn’t not realize that you can speak Chinese and I thought you would amused by two idioms. I shouldn’t have made such assumption and I won’t be surprised that you have more these real experiences than I do.

Everything is political – so let the game continue…
China has informed everyone of his position regarding DaLai long long time ago. If you don’t know the position then you’re excusable, but when you do know then you’re a criminal. EU/America continues to take turn meeting with DaLai on purpose without the consideration as to how the Chinese people is feeling, that show NO RESPECT.
DaLai might be enchanting sweet music and preaching Love into your ear (I can preach the same BS to you, please make me a spiritual leader.) but he practices Violence to the Chinese. (are you blind to the destructive Thugs he has bred in his organization? He’s a very very rich man, you know! many many properties all over the world, guess who gave it to him?) He is a MONSTER to the Chinese people…
If EU/America is trying to show China that’s “democracy” and they have the “right” to meet with anyone they please without the consideration and respect, then China has the same right to cancel what so ever that he feels injustice is doing to him…
I personally cannot stand the French Guy (NS), he got the most annoying face…thick thick skin too…screaming boycott the Beijing Olympic and then showing his face in the game…even the nuclear weapon can’t get thru that thick skin of his…
Everything comes down to…is…RESPECT.
So, the game continue…

Great blog! Sorry to get off subject, but I’m new to town and I’d like to find a great auto repair in Nashville TN. Have you heard of any good ones? There’s a new auto repair shop called Veterans Auto Services, but I’ve only seen a few reviews. Here’s the address of this new Nashville Auto Repair, Veterans Auto Services 2404 Cruzen St Nashville, TN 37211 (615) 712-9777. Thoughts? Thanks!

I am so thrilled I found your site. I really found you by accident, while I was browsing on Yahoo for something else. Anyways I am here now and would just like to say thank you for a great post and an all round enjoyable blog. (I also like the theme/design), I don’t have time to read through it all at the moment, but I have added your website to my favorites, so when I have time I will be back to read more. Please do keep up the awesome job!